Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
My first beta test: http://musicbrainz.org/show/release/?releaseid=551121 see edits http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=6583620 to http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=6583635 (you can search for edits by user davitof) -- Frederic Da Vitoria ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
2007/3/9, Don Redman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 13:29:39 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote: Alternatively you can say: Hey, I'ts a wiki. Just delete stuff as you like, and link to the old revision of the page for historical purpose like this: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/OperaTrackStyle?action=recallrev=33 Yes, but this is for experts who know how a wiki works or for those who are thorough enough to do so. Keeping visible (and searchable) pages seems a better option to me. Maybe these pages could be synthesised a little: I don't think we need to keep track of each specific answer, what is most useful IMO is: - what has been tried, - why it was not kept and - when. Right, as you prefer. Just go for it. BTW What you describe is called TentativeSummary over at The Wiki: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TentativeSummary Second time I've seen you use this web site (I remember the logo). I really must explore it! -- Frederic Da Vitoria ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 13:29:39 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote: Alternatively you can say: Hey, I'ts a wiki. Just delete stuff as you like, and link to the old revision of the page for historical purpose like this: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/OperaTrackStyle?action=recallrev=33 Yes, but this is for experts who know how a wiki works or for those who are thorough enough to do so. Keeping visible (and searchable) pages seems a better option to me. Maybe these pages could be synthesised a little: I don't think we need to keep track of each specific answer, what is most useful IMO is: - what has been tried, - why it was not kept and - when. Right, as you prefer. Just go for it. BTW What you describe is called TentativeSummary over at The Wiki: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TentativeSummary DonRedman -- Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiDocs, the MusicBrainz documentation system. Go to http://musicbrainz.org/doc/SomeTerm (you might need to transform the term to singular) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
On 3/2/07, Don Redman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 13:26:33 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2007/3/2, Aaron Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 3/2/07, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you want to try Don's suggestion yourself? It would mean editing an
actual release this way and telling other users you have done so that
we can see if it works.
I would like to try Don's procedure, but I am unclear as to when the
style becomes official. Would editing a 14-disc 'The Ring' set be
enough of a testing ground? I know that many of those complex
examples exist on a release I own.
I think I will edit that release this afternoon and post the edit #'s
here for everyone to review and we can move forward from there, one
step at a time :)
I suppose we can't really define the number of tests before triggering
the RFV. It depends on the complexity of the rule being tested. For
this one, I suppose the relevant releases are potentially quite
different so we have probably missed problems, but OTOH the rule
itself is pretty simple... and it is really needed! So you can send
the RFV as soon as you think we have enough actual edits to support
it.
My intention was not to place even more burdens on you by having you make
test edits.
I have explained a bit what I *did* mean, and I have done it as a podcast
to save my fingers some typing. It's 5 minutes long (and no, it does not
have a MBID yet ;-) )
http://blog.musicbrainz.org/archives/2007/03/beta_period_for.html
listen, then read on:
I would suggest, you delete all the clutter form the wiki page ('cooked'
discussions, the alternative orderings etc) and then present this as a RFV
pretty soon and without too much fuss. Then we have a 'beta period' for a
while (as explained in voice), and then we make the guideline 'stable'.
I would like to clean up the OTS wiki page, but I dislike the idea of
deleting all documentation of our discussions (and all of Frederic's
work!). What do we think about moving the current OTS contents to
OperaTrackStyleProposal and then using OperaTrackStyle to document the
guidelines?
--
-Aaron
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
2007/3/5, Aaron Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 3/2/07, Don Redman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 13:26:33 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2007/3/2, Aaron Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 3/2/07, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you want to try Don's suggestion yourself? It would mean editing an
actual release this way and telling other users you have done so that
we can see if it works.
I would like to try Don's procedure, but I am unclear as to when the
style becomes official. Would editing a 14-disc 'The Ring' set be
enough of a testing ground? I know that many of those complex
examples exist on a release I own.
I think I will edit that release this afternoon and post the edit #'s
here for everyone to review and we can move forward from there, one
step at a time :)
I suppose we can't really define the number of tests before triggering
the RFV. It depends on the complexity of the rule being tested. For
this one, I suppose the relevant releases are potentially quite
different so we have probably missed problems, but OTOH the rule
itself is pretty simple... and it is really needed! So you can send
the RFV as soon as you think we have enough actual edits to support
it.
My intention was not to place even more burdens on you by having you make
test edits.
I have explained a bit what I *did* mean, and I have done it as a podcast
to save my fingers some typing. It's 5 minutes long (and no, it does not
have a MBID yet ;-) )
http://blog.musicbrainz.org/archives/2007/03/beta_period_for.html
listen, then read on:
I would suggest, you delete all the clutter form the wiki page ('cooked'
discussions, the alternative orderings etc) and then present this as a RFV
pretty soon and without too much fuss. Then we have a 'beta period' for a
while (as explained in voice), and then we make the guideline 'stable'.
I would like to clean up the OTS wiki page, but I dislike the idea of
deleting all documentation of our discussions (and all of Frederic's
work!). What do we think about moving the current OTS contents to
OperaTrackStyleProposal and then using OperaTrackStyle to document the
guidelines?
Yes. Or OperaTrackStyleDiscussion, since it may need a page to discuss
evolutions. I agree keeping track of the history is important. Thus
newcomers may see that some ideas were already suggested and why they
were not kept.
--
Frederic Da Vitoria
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
Original Message From: Aaron Cooper To: MusicBrainz Style Mailing List Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 12:11 AM Subject: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style Okay, I think we need to finally make the OperaTrackStyle and official style guideline. Don Giovanni, Op. 500: Act I, Scene III. (Duettino: Don Giovanni, Zerlina) La ci darem la mano Any thoughts, concerns, comments? I would really like to move ahead with this and get it finalized so we can start enforcing it! Please do not state it down as mandatory with all this details because it's quite complex for everybody. Consider to add first an example of a simple but proper edit, till like simply Là ci darem la mano. Second, if you plan to use this aria, please note it's Là ci darem la mano Marco (ClutchEr2) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
2007/3/2, Aaron Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 3/2/07, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2007/3/2, Marco Sola [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Second, if you plan to use this aria, please note it's Là ci darem la mano Yes, our examples should be perfect! I suggest that we keep an accented example (this one is fine) in order to implicitly remind the reader that spelling is important. I can definitely throw together real examples from multiple works. I used the same example to show the differences between each case. If there are no real objections with the track title format, how do we move ahead in terms of updating the Wiki page? And I apologize if my original email sounded rushed. I got sick of seeing opera edits where I wanted to say by the way, read this and the track titles should be in this format - but I couldn't because we hadn't really decided upon a format for the track titles. I want to get this finalized for the benefit of voters *and* editors. Thanks for doing it. I should have pursued it myself since I started the original thread, and I had told Don I would try his suggested new style evolution procedure, but my work is requesting 150% of my time currently and will probably continue to do so for a few weeks :-( Do you want to try Don's suggestion yourself? It would mean editing an actual release this way and telling other users you have done so that we can see if it works. -- Frederic Da Vitoria ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
2007/3/2, Aaron Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 3/2/07, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2007/3/2, Aaron Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 3/2/07, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2007/3/2, Marco Sola [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Second, if you plan to use this aria, please note it's Là ci darem la mano Yes, our examples should be perfect! I suggest that we keep an accented example (this one is fine) in order to implicitly remind the reader that spelling is important. I can definitely throw together real examples from multiple works. I used the same example to show the differences between each case. If there are no real objections with the track title format, how do we move ahead in terms of updating the Wiki page? And I apologize if my original email sounded rushed. I got sick of seeing opera edits where I wanted to say by the way, read this and the track titles should be in this format - but I couldn't because we hadn't really decided upon a format for the track titles. I want to get this finalized for the benefit of voters *and* editors. Thanks for doing it. I should have pursued it myself since I started the original thread, and I had told Don I would try his suggested new style evolution procedure, but my work is requesting 150% of my time currently and will probably continue to do so for a few weeks :-( You're welcome :) I know how it feels to be swamped with work, but luckily I ran into some extra free time when my only midterm this week was moved back to next Thursday thanks to poor weather! Do you want to try Don's suggestion yourself? It would mean editing an actual release this way and telling other users you have done so that we can see if it works. I would like to try Don's procedure, but I am unclear as to when the style becomes official. Would editing a 14-disc 'The Ring' set be enough of a testing ground? I know that many of those complex examples exist on a release I own. I think I will edit that release this afternoon and post the edit #'s here for everyone to review and we can move forward from there, one step at a time :) I suppose we can't really define the number of tests before triggering the RFV. It depends on the complexity of the rule being tested. For this one, I suppose the relevant releases are potentially quite different so we have probably missed problems, but OTOH the rule itself is pretty simple... and it is really needed! So you can send the RFV as soon as you think we have enough actual edits to support it. -- Frederic Da Vitoria ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mailing] [mb-style] RFC: Opera Track Style
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 13:26:33 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2007/3/2, Aaron Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 3/2/07, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you want to try Don's suggestion yourself? It would mean editing an
actual release this way and telling other users you have done so that
we can see if it works.
I would like to try Don's procedure, but I am unclear as to when the
style becomes official. Would editing a 14-disc 'The Ring' set be
enough of a testing ground? I know that many of those complex
examples exist on a release I own.
I think I will edit that release this afternoon and post the edit #'s
here for everyone to review and we can move forward from there, one
step at a time :)
I suppose we can't really define the number of tests before triggering
the RFV. It depends on the complexity of the rule being tested. For
this one, I suppose the relevant releases are potentially quite
different so we have probably missed problems, but OTOH the rule
itself is pretty simple... and it is really needed! So you can send
the RFV as soon as you think we have enough actual edits to support
it.
My intention was not to place even more burdens on you by having you make
test edits.
I have explained a bit what I *did* mean, and I have done it as a podcast
to save my fingers some typing. It's 5 minutes long (and no, it does not
have a MBID yet ;-) )
http://blog.musicbrainz.org/archives/2007/03/beta_period_for.html
listen, then read on:
I would suggest, you delete all the clutter form the wiki page ('cooked'
discussions, the alternative orderings etc) and then present this as a RFV
pretty soon and without too much fuss. Then we have a 'beta period' for a
while (as explained in voice), and then we make the guideline 'stable'.
What do you think?
DonRedman
--
Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiDocs,
the MusicBrainz documentation system.
Go to http://musicbrainz.org/doc/SomeTerm
(you might need to transform the term to singular)
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
