[mb-style] RFV: CSG for Works, part I
The first part of a Classical Works guideline. http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-195 http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Symphonick/CSG_Works This RFV will expire Thursday, March 7th /symphonick ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFV: CSG for Works, part I
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:41 AM, symphonick symphon...@gmail.com wrote: The first part of a Classical Works guideline. http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-195 http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Symphonick/CSG_Works This RFV will expire Thursday, March 7th One doubt I just saw. Only create translation works when you can source who the translator is on a recorded performance. Do not enter an unknown English version or similar; see different versions above Does that mean we're to claim a translation in English is a recording of a catch-all work in Russian if we don't know who the translator is? Or am I getting this wrong? It'd sound much more reasonable to me to have a catch-all for each language it's translated into (it's not like they will be many, with very rare exceptions)... -- Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Locations and the upcoming schema change
Hello, This may be too complicated, but what about using begin and end dates for areas? And for all relations to the Areas? Here is what I am thinking about: Dates for areas: Some countries have disappeared, others have appeared. Recent country changes are still purely political, so some users may think this is not important, but some historical changes have led to cultural changes too. The fact that Germany or Italy were actually made of several distinct countries is quite relevant. I suppose being born and raised in XVII century Venice is quite different from being from XVII century Florence. But this would also be true of countries or regions which were conquered by different countries or belonged to different countries (Holland and Holland were at one time the same country, Belgium was at one time part of Spain, then of Austria). One other problem here (apart from being maybe difficult to implement) is that this is getting partially out of the scope of MB. I am not speaking of political history, but of the part of political history which is relevant to culture. But any country system we'd create would be equally relevant for other cultural domains such as literature, painting and so on. OTOH, if such a database does not yet exist, maybe we can start it. Dates for relations: Handel is a good example, but of course it should be easy to find lots of current examples too. Some dates can't change. You were born somewhere, you can't be born somewhere from this date to that date and then later be born elsewhere. But some dates are obviously valid for a limited period of time. Living somewhere, having a nationality, these are time-limited relations. So I'd use begin and end dates to the relations. And I'd use several distinct relations: birth (only one per Artist), death (only one per Artist), nationality, maybe residence (some artists chose a nationality for example for tax reasons but essentially live in another country, some artists go live in another country for years but keep their original nationality) for actual persons, foundation and dissolution for groups (I first thought that Foundation should behave like Birth (only one per Artist), then I thought that groups could be founded, then disbanded, then reunited and so on). About migrating current data: how consistently was current data entered? If we are sure it contains only the born/founded date, then I guess it could be simply transferred to the new system. But since you are asking the question, I guess you have doubts. I do. You could create a special migration relation and copy existing data to it. Users would have to delete those relations by transforming them into one of the real relations. 2013/3/5 Ian McEwen ianmcorvi...@ianmcorvidae.net Hi everyone; I'm one of the MB devs, for anyone who doesn't know me already. I'd like to get a bit of feedback on some points of a patch I'm working on for the upcoming May 15 schema change, improving location support. If you'd like more complete details, please see http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-799 (though note that the UI elements of 'places', as outlined there, may happen after May, depending on my schedule). The specific bits I'd like feedback on are to do with migration of existing country fields on artists and labels. Releases are a larger task which I'll leave for a separate time, so those will just work as before, except as they may be affected by other schema change patches. Summary of the new feature, as relevant: a new Area entity type will be created, editable only by a short list of editors (similar to our current relationship and transclusion editors). This will store, well, areas: countries, of course, but also larger areas such as the EU and smaller areas such as states/provinces, counties, and cities. It won't include point locations, such as recording studios, performance venues, etc. Label countries are, I think, fairly well-defined as some sort of based in relation. I propose it be migrated, therefore, to a new label-area AR for 'based in', and the simple column on the table removed; this allows for multiple relations with corresponding dates, rather than the current system with only a single date range and country per label. Though this won't be relevant often, I think it's still valuable. Artists, however, are harder -- our current notion of artist countries is somewhat poorly defined except in the most obvious cases. For example, where does Handel go? He was born in Germany and grew up there, but lived much of his life in London, eventually becoming a naturalised citizen. At present, I see he's set to GB, but this is less than ideal. There's also problems with historically-relevant but no-longer-extant areas. One prominent editor has expressed enthusiasm at being able to add the Archbishopric of Salzburg, for example ;) Here's where a related ticket comes in: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-4925 which asks for country
Re: [mb-style] Locations and the upcoming schema change
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote: About migrating current data: how consistently was current data entered? If we are sure it contains only the born/founded date, then I guess it could be simply transferred to the new system. But since you are asking the question, I guess you have doubts. I do. You could create a special migration relation and copy existing data to it. Users would have to delete those relations by transforming them into one of the real relations. From http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Artist : For people, use the country where they were born and raised. For groups, use the country where the band was formed. If the artist is predominantly active in a different country, use that country instead. Which means *usually*, but certainly far from always, country = birth country for people. But since our current country doesn't *mean* only that, I don't think it'd be too correct to migrate it as if it did... See http://musicbrainz.org/artist/f4a92aac-995b-47ab-80a5-33218a3e7823 for an example (born in Comoros, raised mostly in France, active in France - currently set to France not Comoros). -- Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFV: CSG for Works, part I
2013/3/5 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:41 AM, symphonick symphon...@gmail.com wrote: The first part of a Classical Works guideline. http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-195 http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Symphonick/CSG_Works This RFV will expire Thursday, March 7th One doubt I just saw. Only create translation works when you can source who the translator is on a recorded performance. Do not enter an unknown English version or similar; see different versions above Does that mean we're to claim a translation in English is a recording of a catch-all work in Russian if we don't know who the translator is? Or am I getting this wrong? It'd sound much more reasonable to me to have a catch-all for each language it's translated into (it's not like they will be many, with very rare exceptions)... I agree, some operas have more than one translation, so this rule may make users use a pre-existing translation because they don't know who the actual translator was. -- Frederic Da Vitoria (davitof) Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFV: CSG for Works, part I
2013/3/5 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:41 AM, symphonick symphon...@gmail.com wrote: The first part of a Classical Works guideline. http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-195 http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Symphonick/CSG_Works This RFV will expire Thursday, March 7th One doubt I just saw. Only create translation works when you can source who the translator is on a recorded performance. Do not enter an unknown English version or similar; see different versions above Does that mean we're to claim a translation in English is a recording of a catch-all work in Russian if we don't know who the translator is? Or am I getting this wrong? It'd sound much more reasonable to me to have a catch-all for each language it's translated into (it's not like they will be many, with very rare exceptions)... Yes, my interpretation of catch-all works was that there should be one work where you link everything unknown. Revisions, arrangements, translations - the lot. And I do believe most vocal works are available in most European languages, for starters. Not very rare at all. IMO this should be solved with a translated performance AR. /symphonick ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
[mb-style] UI change: Show parent works in sub-works search results and pages
http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-5983 Needed before we can continue with work titles. I'm hoping for suggestions about the best way to present this in the UI. More columns? Tree view? etc. /symphonick ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] UI change: Show parent works in sub-works search results and pages
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:40 PM, symphonick symphon...@gmail.com wrote: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-5983 Needed before we can continue with work titles. I'm hoping for suggestions about the best way to present this in the UI. More columns? Tree view? etc. Even if the UI was changed in MB proper, wouldn't this make the data pretty annoying for anyone else who wants to use it? A webservice user or whatever would also need to somehow find out which of all the Allegros they're dealing with, and the database would only store Allegro , etc. I don't see how this gives enough benefits to outdo the annoyance it would cause. -- Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] UI change: Show parent works in sub-works search results and pages
2013/3/5 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:40 PM, symphonick symphon...@gmail.com wrote: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-5983 Needed before we can continue with work titles. I'm hoping for suggestions about the best way to present this in the UI. More columns? Tree view? etc. Even if the UI was changed in MB proper, wouldn't this make the data pretty annoying for anyone else who wants to use it? A webservice user or whatever would also need to somehow find out which of all the Allegros they're dealing with, and the database would only store Allegro , etc. I don't see how this gives enough benefits to outdo the annoyance it would cause. Yes, you need to know where you are in the works structure. I assume you look after parent works? Something simply has to be done about the redundancy - change a letter or a comma in a top level title, and then you have to manually change how many titles? Only 4 if you're lucky, 140 if you're not so lucky. I'm unsure if an automatic solution (that appends titles and then takes them apart again so you never manually edit the appended part) will work. We'd need a way to exclude certain top-level works, like collections, and currently I'm not sure that there wont be language issues. But if it is the only way I guess we will have to make it work somehow. /symphonick ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Locations and the upcoming schema change
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 10:40:18AM +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote: Hello, This may be too complicated, but what about using begin and end dates for areas? And for all relations to the Areas? Here is what I am thinking about: Areas have begin and end dates. They're full entities, like any other. ARs, of course, always have dates. So most of the bit I've excluded here of your email is already well-covered :) foundation and dissolution for groups (I first thought that Foundation should behave like Birth (only one per Artist), then I thought that groups could be founded, then disbanded, then reunited and so on). This is a separate ticket, about multiple begin/end dates; after the addition of locations, it will presumably need to be updated to multiple begin/end dates + multiple begin/end locations. About migrating current data: how consistently was current data entered? If we are sure it contains only the born/founded date, then I guess it could be simply transferred to the new system. But since you are asking the question, I guess you have doubts. I do. You could create a special migration relation and copy existing data to it. Users would have to delete those relations by transforming them into one of the real relations. That's my fallback plan unless someone has a real answer to the question of consistency, and a clear notion of what's acceptable amounts of error. Obviously the only example I've provided thus far (Handel) is also one of the artists that would fail from setting it to birth location. However, in many cases within my own editing, I've seen people simply set no country at all if there's confusion, which would mean migrating to birth location would work nicely. I'm hoping this list has an idea how frequent the exceptions are. But if it doesn't I'll just keep the field and deprecate it, providing tools to migrate that location to more exact fields. There's only a couple hundred thousand in the DB, right? ;) -- Ian McEwen ianmcorvi...@ianmcorvidae.net ih...@hampshire.edu A262 D5C4 40CB 0E1C 5F24 C3A1 ABED 1ABD 7131 A76F http://ianmcorvidae.net/ pgpyqZ8oDr1pb.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
[mb-style] Work-Work summary
Hello, I have started assembling a general guideline about when to use ther different Work-Work ARs: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:DavitoF/How_To_Link_Works_Together This is a very early version. I certainly did some language mistakes, many examples are missing and the explanations are quite terse (but that is frequently an issue with my way of writing). I'd like an example in classical music and a non-classical example for each. This has triggered a few questions: - when the transcription or arrangement was made by someone whose language is different from the language of the original author, should the secondary version use the language / script of the original work or the language / script of the transcriber / arranger? I am thinking of Ravel's transcription of the Pictures at an exhibition. The transcription is so well known that many people even ignore it wasn't originally written by Ravel. But currently it appears in Ravel's Work list in cyrillic. - I won't use Stravinsky's Petroushka http://musicbrainz.org/work/cb04cba5-603f-4d40-b128-a7ae4a356197 http://musicbrainz.org/work/57deae1f-4fb3-40c3-aa4f-3167ea0e806a in the examples because I can't decide if the title should use the French or the English spelling, but also because I can't decide if the Revision or Version AR should be used? -- Frederic Da Vitoria (davitof) Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
[mb-style] “Circa” dates options
I’m trying to push http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-2954 forward, and in doing so I created the following page to get some input on the options from the ticket http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Hawke/Proposal/Circa Thanks for any feedback you can provide! ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Work-Work summary
2013/3/5 Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.com Hello, I have started assembling a general guideline about when to use ther different Work-Work ARs: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:DavitoF/How_To_Link_Works_Together This is a very early version. I certainly did some language mistakes, many examples are missing and the explanations are quite terse (but that is frequently an issue with my way of writing). I'd like an example in classical music and a non-classical example for each. This has triggered a few questions: - when the transcription or arrangement was made by someone whose language is different from the language of the original author, should the secondary version use the language / script of the original work or the language / script of the transcriber / arranger? I am thinking of Ravel's transcription of the Pictures at an exhibition. The transcription is so well known that many people even ignore it wasn't originally written by Ravel. But currently it appears in Ravel's Work list in cyrillic. I prefer using the original title of the work, which would mean the language / script of the arranger. But there's no title guideline yet... I'm a little reluctant to transcriptions. When is the work a transcription, and when is it an arrangement? I noticed that one of the recordings in this case uses arr.. And can you explain when a new version is not based on? - I won't use Stravinsky's Petroushka http://musicbrainz.org/work/cb04cba5-603f-4d40-b128-a7ae4a356197 http://musicbrainz.org/work/57deae1f-4fb3-40c3-aa4f-3167ea0e806a in the examples because I can't decide if the title should use the French or the English spelling, but also because I can't decide if the Revision or Version AR should be used? French, since it was written for Ballet Russes. English is totally out of the question, IMO. Wikipedia says revision - this looks like a typical case, more or less exactly what I had in mind when I wrote the proposal. Or am I missing something? /symphonick ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] “Circa” dates options
On Mar 5, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote: I’m trying to push http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-2954 forward, and in doing so I created the following page to get some input on the options from the ticket http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Hawke/Proposal/Circa Thanks for any feedback you can provide! The before and after options sound like a great idea to me. They can be used when we can't estimate a date for sure, and we only know the event could have only occurred after or before a certain date. For example, many Japanese people register their marriages on undisclosed dates and wait a long time to announce it. ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Work-Work summary
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote: Hello, I have started assembling a general guideline about when to use ther different Work-Work ARs: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:DavitoF/How_To_Link_Works_Together Would it be helpful to link to the following wiki page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcription_%28music%29 Or maybe borrow something from the second paragraph: Transcription may also mean rewriting a piece of music, either solo or ensemble, for another instrument or other instruments than which it was originally intended. The Beethoven Symphonies by Franz Liszt are a good example. Transcription in this sense is sometimes called arrangement, although strictly speaking transcriptions are faithful adaptations, whereas arrangements change significant aspects of the original piece. For Revision, you have for new versions of the work by the same author (similar instrumentation). I take that to mean that if a composer transcribes his/her own own work to different instruments, we would use Transcription, not Revision (there are some good examples of this on the wikipedia page). Is that correct? -- -:-:- David K. Gasaway -:-:- Email: d...@gasaway.org ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] “Circa” dates options
On 03/05/2013 12:03 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: I’m trying to push http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-2954 forward, and in doing so I created the following page to get some input on the options from the ticket http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Hawke/Proposal/Circa Thanks for any feedback you can provide! I updated the first option to be 'a circa checkbox *for each date*' since it seems clear that this will be necessary at a minimum. I was the only one in favor of this option, so it shouldn’t affect anyone else's input, but thought I should point out the change. ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] “Circa” dates options
Perhaps another simple way for this information to be displayed or stored would be to use wildcards. Perhaps a '?' or 'x'. For example 197? for something in the 70s, or 16?? for the 17th century. For very old classical works, say, gregorian chants, the only info we might have is the century. Having circa 1300 sounds odd. To me circa works if we're pretty close to the actual date, or year, but not quite. Therefore, I would prefer 13?? to circa 1300. Before and after are necessary though, Option 2 would work fine for me. Sebastien On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote: On 03/05/2013 12:03 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: I’m trying to push http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-2954 forward, and in doing so I created the following page to get some input on the options from the ticket http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Hawke/Proposal/Circa Thanks for any feedback you can provide! I updated the first option to be 'a circa checkbox *for each date*' since it seems clear that this will be necessary at a minimum. I was the only one in favor of this option, so it shouldn’t affect anyone else's input, but thought I should point out the change. ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Work-Work summary
2013/3/5 David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote: Hello, I have started assembling a general guideline about when to use ther different Work-Work ARs: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:DavitoF/How_To_Link_Works_Together Would it be helpful to link to the following wiki page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcription_%28music%29 Or maybe borrow something from the second paragraph: Transcription may also mean rewriting a piece of music, either solo or ensemble, for another instrument or other instruments than which it was originally intended. The Beethoven Symphonies by Franz Liszt are a good example. Transcription in this sense is sometimes called arrangement, although strictly speaking transcriptions are faithful adaptations, whereas arrangements change significant aspects of the original piece. I thought maybe transcription is used more often for piano music, and when solo instruments are involved? But further reading on that wikipedia page (BTW relevant references is missing?) gives me the impression that everything is a compete mess, as usual :-( Other examples of this type of transcription include Bach's arrangement... I think we have to turn to Oxford Music Online or similar to sort this out. If they label specific works as either transcriptions or arrangements, it would be even better. I'm not wild about editors debating whether a certain work is a faithful adaptation or not... For Revision, you have for new versions of the work by the same author (similar instrumentation). I take that to mean that if a composer transcribes his/her own own work to different instruments, we would use Transcription, not Revision (there are some good examples of this on the wikipedia page). Is that correct? If it is a transcription http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%BCbler_Choralesyes, but not if it is a revision: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrushka_%28ballet%29 :-) /symphonick ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] “Circa” dates options
On Mar 5, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Lemire, Sebastien m...@benji99.ca wrote: Perhaps another simple way for this information to be displayed or stored would be to use wildcards. Perhaps a '?' or 'x'. For example 197? for something in the 70s, or 16?? for the 17th century. For very old classical works, say, gregorian chants, the only info we might have is the century. Having circa 1300 sounds odd. To me circa works if we're pretty close to the actual date, or year, but not quite. Therefore, I would prefer 13?? to circa 1300. Before and after are necessary though, Option 2 would work fine for me. Sebastien That sounds good too. Alex, I'll +1 your proposal for now. On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote: On 03/05/2013 12:03 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: I’m trying to push http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-2954 forward, and in doing so I created the following page to get some input on the options from the ticket http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Hawke/Proposal/Circa Thanks for any feedback you can provide! I updated the first option to be 'a circa checkbox *for each date*' since it seems clear that this will be necessary at a minimum. I was the only one in favor of this option, so it shouldn’t affect anyone else's input, but thought I should point out the change. ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Work-Work summary
2013/3/5 symphonick symphon...@gmail.com 2013/3/5 Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.com Hello, I have started assembling a general guideline about when to use ther different Work-Work ARs: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:DavitoF/How_To_Link_Works_Together This is a very early version. I certainly did some language mistakes, many examples are missing and the explanations are quite terse (but that is frequently an issue with my way of writing). I'd like an example in classical music and a non-classical example for each. This has triggered a few questions: - when the transcription or arrangement was made by someone whose language is different from the language of the original author, should the secondary version use the language / script of the original work or the language / script of the transcriber / arranger? I am thinking of Ravel's transcription of the Pictures at an exhibition. The transcription is so well known that many people even ignore it wasn't originally written by Ravel. But currently it appears in Ravel's Work list in cyrillic. I prefer using the original title of the work, which would mean the language / script of the arranger. But there's no title guideline yet... I'm a little reluctant to transcriptions. When is the work a transcription, and when is it an arrangement? I noticed that one of the recordings in this case uses arr.. I decided to include all pages from http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Category:Alternative_Version_Relationship_Class, and I really believe that all relations from that page should be part of this summary. If we decide to remove (or merge together) some relation(s), then we'll edit this summary accordingly. Which reminds me, http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Category:Alternative_Version_Relationship_Classshould be edited to link to the summary page. And can you explain when a new version is not based on? - I won't use Stravinsky's Petroushka http://musicbrainz.org/work/cb04cba5-603f-4d40-b128-a7ae4a356197 http://musicbrainz.org/work/57deae1f-4fb3-40c3-aa4f-3167ea0e806a in the examples because I can't decide if the title should use the French or the English spelling, but also because I can't decide if the Revision or Version AR should be used? French, since it was written for Ballet Russes. English is totally out of the question, IMO. Wikipedia says revision - this looks like a typical case, more or less exactly what I had in mind when I wrote the proposal. Or am I missing something? No, *I* was missing the different author in Other version :-P -- Frederic Da Vitoria (davitof) Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Work-Work summary
2013/3/5 David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote: Hello, I have started assembling a general guideline about when to use ther different Work-Work ARs: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:DavitoF/How_To_Link_Works_Together Would it be helpful to link to the following wiki page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcription_%28music%29 Or maybe borrow something from the second paragraph: Transcription may also mean rewriting a piece of music, either solo or ensemble, for another instrument or other instruments than which it was originally intended. The Beethoven Symphonies by Franz Liszt are a good example. Transcription in this sense is sometimes called arrangement, although strictly speaking transcriptions are faithful adaptations, whereas arrangements change significant aspects of the original piece. I included your suggestions. Thanks. For Revision, you have for new versions of the work by the same author (similar instrumentation). I take that to mean that if a composer transcribes his/her own own work to different instruments, we would use Transcription, not Revision (there are some good examples of this on the wikipedia page). Is that correct? Correct. That's why I wrote similar instrumentation on Revision. -- Frederic Da Vitoria (davitof) Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
