Re: [mb-style] RFV-268: had launch event at

[Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren]

Added!
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] Classical Style FAQ in conflict with style guide

[monxton]

On 20/11/2013 13:11, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
> Yeah. That classical FAQ is horribly outdated, and I think the best
> option is to simply remove it.

I knew you were going to say that :-)

That particular answer is quite wrong, I agree. But there is some good 
stuff in there, and there is little enough guidance for classical 
editors. The explanation about using the composer as artist could still 
be relevant to the use of the composer in the tracklist.


___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] RFV-268: had launch event at

[Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen]

Den 18-11-2013 14:44, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen skrev:
> Jira: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-268
> Expiration: 2013-11-20

And it has passed.

reo? :)

-- 
Namasté,
Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen 
MB:   https://musicbrainz.org/user/Freso
Wiki: https://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Freso

___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] Classical Style FAQ in conflict with style guide

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2013/11/20 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 

>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria 
> wrote:
>
>> 2013/11/20 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 
>>
>>> Yeah. That classical FAQ is horribly outdated, and I think the best
>>> option is to simply remove it.
>>>
>>
>> I suggest it should only be marked as outdated and it should be updated.
>> I don't think we have a FAQ anywhere and this is definitely something
>> useful.
>>
>
> Thanks for volunteering to update it ;)
>

Yeah, I knew this would be the consequence :D

OK, I'll take it.

-- 
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] Classical Style FAQ in conflict with style guide

[Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren]

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:

> 2013/11/20 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 
>
>> Yeah. That classical FAQ is horribly outdated, and I think the best
>> option is to simply remove it.
>>
>
> I suggest it should only be marked as outdated and it should be updated. I
> don't think we have a FAQ anywhere and this is definitely something useful.
>

Thanks for volunteering to update it ;)

-- 
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] Classical Style FAQ in conflict with style guide

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2013/11/20 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 

> Yeah. That classical FAQ is horribly outdated, and I think the best option
> is to simply remove it.
>

I suggest it should only be marked as outdated and it should be updated. I
don't think we have a FAQ anywhere and this is definitely something useful.

-- 
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] Classical Style FAQ in conflict with style guide

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2013/11/20 godIsInTheRadio 

> Hi there,
>
> in the classical Style FAQ (
> http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Classical_Music_FAQ
>   ) it says
> "So should the artist be used for performer or composer?
>
> For the near future you should use the artist field for composer NOT
> performer. The performer should become part of the release title or the
> track title. See the Classical Style Guide for a more detailed explanation.
> "
>
> This seems in contradiction to what is said in the Classical Style Guide
> "The Recording Artist field should contain the most important performers
> who
> appear on that specific recording, but it is acceptable that newly-created
> recordings have their artist information derived from a tracklist. Use a
> comma between multiple artists."
> ( http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Classical/Recording/Artist
>   )
>
> resp.
>
> "The Release Artist of a classical Release should include the composer(s)
> and performers featured on the front cover (except when "Various Artists"
> is
> used, see below). Use only composers and performers who are featured on the
> front cover (or the spine); don't add artists from the back cover or the
> inside of the booklet or other places. "
> ( http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Classical/Release/Artist
>   )
>
> this unfortunately leads to ambiguos / random entries to the artist field
> of
> a classical release resp. recording.
>

CSG was amended last and using the performers as Artist for Recordings is
what we currently recommend. In other words, the FAQ is obsolete. Actually,
very obsolete: the word "recording" in the sense should be understood as
the common word, not what MB calls Recording. The FAQ was written at a time
when MB did not have Recordings, only Releases and Tracks.

-- 
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] Classical Style FAQ in conflict with style guide

[Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren]

Yeah. That classical FAQ is horribly outdated, and I think the best option
is to simply remove it.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

[mb-style] Classical Style FAQ in conflict with style guide

[godIsInTheRadio]

Hi there,

in the classical Style FAQ ( http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Classical_Music_FAQ
  ) it says
"So should the artist be used for performer or composer?

For the near future you should use the artist field for composer NOT
performer. The performer should become part of the release title or the
track title. See the Classical Style Guide for a more detailed explanation.
"

This seems in contradiction to what is said in the Classical Style Guide
"The Recording Artist field should contain the most important performers who
appear on that specific recording, but it is acceptable that newly-created
recordings have their artist information derived from a tracklist. Use a
comma between multiple artists."
( http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Classical/Recording/Artist
  )

resp.

"The Release Artist of a classical Release should include the composer(s)
and performers featured on the front cover (except when "Various Artists" is
used, see below). Use only composers and performers who are featured on the
front cover (or the spine); don't add artists from the back cover or the
inside of the booklet or other places. "
( http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Classical/Release/Artist
  )

this unfortunately leads to ambiguos / random entries to the artist field of
a classical release resp. recording.

Marcus



--
View this message in context: 
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Classical-Style-FAQ-in-conflict-with-style-guide-tp4659883.html
Sent from the MusicBrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style