Re: [mb-style] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

> On Feb 2, 2015, at 6:50 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren > wrote: > > Hi! > > Ages ago (before my style time) an RFC passed to implement "step" and "half" > attributes for the sibling relationship, and "step" for the parent/child one. > This was never implemented, and there's a ticket for it

Re: [mb-style] Cover Art Style Guide

> On Jan 14, 2015, at 8:40 PM, Bill Purosky wrote: > > For mine, I number all the pages in the book style booklets and I label the > fold out type "obverse" and "reverse". I'd like to see some guidelines also > so we can all get on the same page. > > Examples: > http://musicbrainz.org/releas

Re: [mb-style] Cover Art Style Guide

> On Jan 13, 2015, at 6:25 PM, Jim Duke > wrote: > > Please correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm very likely to be wrong). I've > poured over the style guide and couldn't find a style guild pertaining to > Cover Art. I can find how-to's. I can find advice. Bu

Re: [mb-style] Cover Art Style Guide

> On Jan 13, 2015, at 6:25 PM, Jim Duke > wrote: > > Please correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm very likely to be wrong). I've > poured over the style guide and couldn't find a style guild pertaining to > Cover Art. I can find how-to's. I can find advice. Bu

Re: [mb-style] Musical quotation/lyrical references (STYLE-348)

I made a wiki page about this a while back. http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKazeneko/Interpolation_relationship_type This is commonly referred to as “interpolation” and in many cases has led to lawsuits

Re: [mb-style] Style for classical track titles (STYLE-344) - untitled works only?

> On Nov 7, 2014, at 3:49 PM, caller#6 wrote: > > On 11/07/2014 01:11 PM, SwissChris wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:02 PM, caller#6 > > wrote: >> On 11/06/2014 03:05 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 12:56 AM, caller#6 >>

Re: [mb-style] Style for classical track titles (STYLE-344)

On Nov 5, 2014, at 1:03 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > [block of text removed to save space] > > Well, it mostly means "We should probably write those guidelines". But I > can't really do that for languages I do not speak, so volunteers appreciated > :) Ditto. I’ve brushed up again

Re: [mb-style] Changes to our style process (Important)

On Oct 23, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > On 2014-10-23 00:30, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: >> For checking what changes have happened, we'll be posting on the blog >> (category "Style") a list of implemented changes every two weeks (more or >> less). > Can we get versioned (or

Re: [mb-style] Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

On Oct 20, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > A lot of orchestral releases give information on the orchestra's > leader/concertmaster for that recording. Similarly, orchestra sites fairly > often provide information about the concertmaster position. As WP says, "The > conce

Re: [mb-style] RFV: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

On Sep 3, 2014, at 3:12 PM, caller#6 wrote: > On 09/03/2014 04:39 AM, Tom Crocker wrote: >> The "definition" I've written says "usually" and "typically" so that >> should give enough wriggle-room to editors to decide on a case-by-case >> basis. I'm very happy that box sets don't have to compil

Re: [mb-style] RFV: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

On Sep 3, 2014, at 6:39 AM, Tom Crocker wrote: > > I thought “box set” was just an idiom for a large compilation spread out over > multiple media, whether physical or digital > Presumably if it's digital it doesn't need to have multiple media? Thoretically, yes. In practice I’ve seen digita

Re: [mb-style] RFV: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

On Sep 2, 2014, at 12:24 PM, caller#6 wrote: > > In my mind, the important points are "contains other release groups" and/or > "identifies itself as a box set". Not all 3-disc compilations feel like a > "box" to me. > > But then the real world may disagree with me. > Amazon defines/describes

[mb-style] Artist collectives/Japanese soundtrack style

This is a continuation of Staffan’s discussion on Various Artists credits. In Japan, it is extremely common for composers to form loose groups with other composers. These groups are commonly called “collectives” among English-speaking J-Pop fans. Usually these collectives consist of freelance c

Re: [mb-style] Sorting of fictitious names

On Aug 26, 2014, at 10:02 AM, jesus2099 wrote: > Even a fictious name, David Bowie should be sorted in Bowie, not in David. > I don’t think there should be difference in sort names just because it’s a > real name or not. > Same for fictional characters, Sherlock Holmes is sorted in H. Right. It

Re: [mb-style] When various artists releases aren't various artists releases

On Aug 25, 2014, at 3:42 PM, Staffan wrote: > Rachel Dwight skrev: > > Umm, yes, there is. > > http://vgmdb.net/artist/450 > > And that is evidence for that that "artist" shold be the album artist of this > release? Japanese record companies do not credit s

Re: [mb-style] When various artists releases aren't various artists releases

On Aug 25, 2014, at 3:00 PM, Staffan wrote: > 25 augusti 2014, Rachel Dwight skrev: >> >> I see this a lot with Japanese music. Composers and indie artists often >> organize together in loosely-connected collectives (sometimes called >> “circles”) to compose and

Re: [mb-style] When various artists releases aren't various artists releases

On Aug 25, 2014, at 1:37 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Staffan wrote: > A series of my edits where I changed some releases to various artists > releases since, well, they were various artists releases have been downvoted > with no comment > http://mu

Re: [mb-style] RFC: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

On Aug 25, 2014, at 4:21 AM, Tom Crocker wrote: > > To indicate this we will hopefully be able to use caller#6's proposed > "available as part of" relationship [1], on which the source Release Group > type could perhaps be indicated, as already happens with "single/EP from" > (I'm not sure if

Re: [mb-style] RFC: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

On Aug 24, 2014, at 8:21 PM, Sheamus Patt wrote: > > Wouldn't this be better as a Secondary type, like Compilation? It could > then be combined with other primary types e.g. EP, as they are > occasionally packaged as box sets as well. Some of the time it would be. Most of the box sets that I’ve

Re: [mb-style] RFC: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

+1 I’ve wanted this for years. On Aug 24, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Tom Crocker wrote: > I thought it was worth giving this a go. > Preliminary date for RFC to end: 2014-09-01 00:00 UTC > Jira ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-335 > wiki page: > http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/index.php?

[mb-style] RFC STYLE-332: Even more new packaging types

As we are all aware, there are a plethora of packaging types that we have yet to account for in MB. Here are two big ones: SnapPack - The classic 8cm CD packaging. A plastic frame with a cardboard outer cover (sometimes with an additional plastic outer shell), designed so it can fold ("snap") i

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC: Rename disambiguation field "Description"

On Aug 15, 2014, at 2:06 PM, caller#6 wrote: > > > So "distinguish identically named artists, labels and other entities" is the > stated goal of the field. A narrow reading of that would be "entities already > in the database under that name", but that's not the only possible reading. > Any

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC: Rename disambiguation field "Description"

On Aug 15, 2014, at 11:34 AM, Staffan wrote: > 15 augusti 2014, Rachel Dwight skrev: >> >> >> Except in cases where the name is trademarked. It is safe to say that there >> will never be another Jay Z, for example, since Shawn "Jay Z” Carter is >>

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC: Rename disambiguation field "Description"

On Aug 15, 2014, at 5:30 AM, LordSputnik wrote: > Rachel Dwight wrote >> https://musicbrainz.org/doc/Disambiguation_Comment states that >> disambiguation comments are intended to differentiate between/among 2 or >> more identically named artists/labels/entities. >

[mb-style] Pre-RFC: Rename disambiguation field "Description"

https://musicbrainz.org/doc/Disambiguation_Comment states that disambiguation comments are intended to differentiate between/among 2 or more identically named artists/labels/entities. It explicitly states that the field is not to be used as a general description field, yet some editors are dead

Re: [mb-style] box sets etc. -- packaging vs type

On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:30 PM, caller#6 wrote: > On 08/04/2014 10:04 AM, Tom Crocker wrote: >> I'm starting a separate thread for all discussion of a new type (be it >> primary or secondary) for box sets (or whatever we might call them) so >> bflaminio's RFC [1] doesn't get hijacked. >> There's

Re: [mb-style] RFC: Make 2-on-1 (or generically, M-on-N) release groups "Compilations"

I already classify these releases as “Other+Compilation.” I (and a few others) have suggested adding a new primary release group type “Box Set” but so far nothing has been done to said end. On Aug 3, 2014, at 10:01 PM, bflaminio wrote: > The Release Group style guide indicates that the followi

Re: [mb-style] Sorting of fictitious names

I definitely support using traditional sorting of names regardless of whether the subject is real or fictional. Having an exemption is not only pointless, it’s confusing. Would this cover performance names or alter egos (e.g. Ziggy Stardust)? What about characters whose names are normally writte

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC Japanese extra title information

On Jul 10, 2014, at 1:52 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 07/10/2014 01:10 PM, Kuno Woudt wrote: No, it is normal that 恋の子守歌/焼鳥を食べるな!(カラオケ) looks awkard it’s not a brwoser bug. You have to use ばか馬の子守歌／焼鳥を食べるな！（カラオケ） like printed as it’s made for that especially. >>> They both look

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC Japanese extra title information

On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 07/07/2014 09:12 AM, jesus2099 wrote: >> IMO, we don’t need rules, we don’t need no more headaches, we just need to >> follow what is printed, except mistakes. The caps are already followed as is >> for japanese tracklists anyway. >> Except mis

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-326: New packaging type: Longbox

On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:16 AM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 7/6/2014 6:39 PM, Lotheric wrote: >> RFC expected expiration date: 2014-07-14. >> >> I would like the Longbox packaging type to be added. > > +1, I see no reason not to have this. > > It should perhaps also be a cover art type as Rachel sugg

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-326: New packaging type: Longbox

-1 I’d rather see this as a cover art type. On Jul 6, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Lotheric wrote: > RFC expected expiration date: 2014-07-14. > > I would like the Longbox packaging type to be added. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longbox > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_disc_packaging#External

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC Japanese extra title information

; 。 vs . > 、 vs , > > I think we should definitely be using　。 and 、but I find the Japanese ！and > ？very ugly... That said, my guess is that we should be using them. > > Any thoughts? > > Sebastien > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Rachel Dwight &

[mb-style] Ranged catalog numbers

This is a continuation of a discussion that sprang up in http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Pre-RFC-Japanese-extra-title-information-td4666219.html and caused that thread to veer off course. Many multi-disc releases have catalog numbers that are printed as -12345~6 or -12345/6. Th

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC Japanese extra title information

releases that were sold here in Canada > and found a single CatNO for the whole release. > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 06/24/2014 09:50 PM, Rachel Dwight wrote: > > Ditto. I don’t know if you caught it but I did mention that we need to > >

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC Japanese extra title information

On Jun 24, 2014, at 2:49 PM, Lemire, Sebastien wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 06/21/2014 09:19 PM, Lemire, Sebastien wrote: > > I'm currently cleaning/merging the サザンオールスターズ > > > >

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC Japanese extra title information

On Jun 21, 2014, at 9:19 PM, Lemire, Sebastien wrote: > Hi guys, I'd like to bring some clarification on some specific Japanese style > points that are not mentioned in the official Japanese style. > > Hi guys > > I'm currently cleaning/merging the サザンオールスターズ works/recordings/tracks and > fi

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-318: Rights society affiliation relationships

On Jun 2, 2014, at 8:39 AM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 6/2/2014 2:15 AM, Rachel Dwight wrote: >> OK, I added a little more clarification of the word “affiliation.” >> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKazeneko/Rights_society_affiliation > > > The definition

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-318: Rights society affiliation relationships

OK, I added a little more clarification of the word “affiliation.” http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKazeneko/Rights_society_affiliation I’m extending this RFC again so more people can weigh in. New expected expiration date: 2014-6-9 > > ___ >>

Re: [mb-style] Japanese catalog numbers

I finally made a forum thread: http://forums.musicbrainz.org/viewtopic.php?pid=26279 > > -- > View this message in context: > http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Japanese-catalog-numbers-tp4664947p4665459.html > Sent from the MusicBrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > __

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-318: Rights society affiliation relationships

On May 16, 2014, at 6:34 PM, Tom Crocker wrote: > > On 16 May 2014 19:34, "Rachel Dwight" wrote: > > > > > > On May 16, 2014, at 2:05 AM, Tom Crocker wrote: > > > >> > >> Doesn't a rights society collect royalties from publish

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-318: Rights society affiliation relationships

On May 16, 2014, at 2:05 AM, Tom Crocker wrote: > I don't know enough about whether rights society affiliations are always > exclusive. > A few suggestions on the wording: > You probably shouldn't SHOUT. > Fixed. Bold letters are a little more visible. > Doesn't a rights society collect roya

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-318: Rights society affiliation relationships

n that publisher licensed the work). It’s not what I really want, but it’ll work until we can implement something better. (In case you all haven’t noticed I’m extending the RFC so everyone can weigh in.) > > On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 19:56 -0500, Rachel Dwight wrote: >> Currently we can link a

Re: [mb-style] Japanese catalog numbers

On May 13, 2014, at 3:14 AM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 5/12/2014 12:41 PM, Duke Yin wrote: >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Dkeoj6eqy_YG0CM6WmqGYo_0xN1b67B80uRrEaUXF8s/edit?usp=sharing >> >> This does not cover every release ever distributed, but it should cover >> the vast majority of t

Re: [mb-style] "Purchase for mail-order" blacklist

On May 12, 2014, at 10:25 AM, Calvin Walton wrote: > On Mon, 2014-05-12 at 11:14 -0400, Calvin Walton wrote: >> On Sat, 2014-05-10 at 03:54 -0500, Rachel Dwight wrote: >>> On Nov 16, 2013, at 6:07 PM, jesus2099 wrote: >>> >>>> mmh do not know. >>

Re: [mb-style] Japanese catalog numbers

On May 11, 2014, at 10:52 AM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 5/11/2014 3:08 AM, Rachel Dwight wrote: >> >> On May 11, 2014, at 2:55 AM, Frederik Freso S. Olesen >> wrote: >> >>> Den 11-05-2014 09:04, Rachel Dwight skrev: >>>> Yes, this issue came up ag

Re: [mb-style] Japanese catalog numbers

On May 11, 2014, at 2:55 AM, Frederik Freso S. Olesen wrote: > Den 11-05-2014 09:04, Rachel Dwight skrev: >> Yes, this issue came up again. The community is split down the middle as >> to how to handle Japanese catalog numbers. Currently we have no >> clear-cut guideline

[mb-style] Japanese catalog numbers

Yes, this issue came up again. The community is split down the middle as to how to handle Japanese catalog numbers. Currently we have no clear-cut guideline as to how to present the data, so I crafted this working draft of a potential style guideline. http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKaz

Re: [mb-style] "Purchase for mail-order" blacklist

On Nov 16, 2013, at 6:07 PM, jesus2099 wrote: > mmh do not know. > i do not really fancy the white/black list concept… i prefer voting. > this toysetc example is off line site by the way. > you should propose other examples maybe to see if it is good list. :) I just ran across a site we might w

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-318: Rights society affiliation relationships

ence of a rights society’s name in liner notes as that society being a publisher. That is not the case. I guess I’ll have to draft a guideline or two… > > On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 19:56 -0500, Rachel Dwight wrote: >> Currently we can link a rights society to a release but not to the >

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-318: Rights society affiliation relationships

cluded a label-label variant primarily for publishers. Should I stipulate that too? > Jesse > > On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 19:56 -0500, Rachel Dwight wrote: >> Currently we can link a rights society to a release but not to the >> artists and labels it represents. This proposa

[mb-style] RFC STYLE-318: Rights society affiliation relationships

Currently we can link a rights society to a release but not to the artists and labels it represents. This proposal is designed to fix the issue via a simple AR. TIcket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-318 Wiki page: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKazeneko/Rights_society_af

Re: [mb-style] RFC Previously known as artist relationship

On Apr 20, 2014, at 9:34 AM, Ulrich Klauer wrote: >> For cases where we have an artist or group change name for legal >> reasons or otherwise it would be good to have links between the >> previous name and current name. > > Please explain a) for persons, in what way this would differ from the

Re: [mb-style] RFC Previously known as artist relationship

+1 In a lot of cases it’s not practical to merge the artists together, especially if they have composition or performance ARs under the previous name. On Apr 19, 2014, at 9:17 PM, Daniel Sobey wrote: > Expected expiration date: 5th of May 2014 > Ticket: STYLE-314 http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC: Auto-link Soundcloud URLs to "Streaming music" ARs for Releases & Recordings

+1 It’s not guaranteed that linked tracks will be available for download. On Apr 14, 2014, at 12:18 AM, Jesse W wrote: > The title pretty much says it all. In IRC > http://chatlogs.musicbrainz.org/musicbrainz/2014/2014-04/2014-04-14.html#T04-57-03-32932 > , it was suggested the Soundcloud URLS,

Re: [mb-style] RFC add ISBN to works

+1 I’ve seen ISBNs on a handful of music CDs and tapes in my collection. Should we add an option to add ISBNs to releases at some point? On Apr 9, 2014, at 7:52 AM, Daniel Sobey wrote: > Expected expiration date: 23rd of April 2014 > Ticket: STYLE-314 http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE

[mb-style] RFC STYLE-313: New label type "Agency"

There are certain labels in our database that we have no term for, such as http://musicbrainz.org/label/62472b9a-778c-4559-bb43-0557f8542d2e . These labels are called "talent agencies," or simply "agencies." They provide services (such as artist management) that are currently irrelevant to MB, b

[mb-style] RFV STYLE-310: New work attributes

OK, I got a few +1s, so this is cleared for RFV. For those who’ve forgotten, what I proposed in the RFC was to add work identifiers from ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, GEMA, SOCAN, KOMCA, MŪST and APRA’s respective repertory search engines as work attributes, much like the current JASRAC ID attribute. Exp

Re: [mb-style] Are "Pay what you want" the same as free?

On Mar 25, 2014, at 7:48 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Staffan Vilcans > wrote: > > This originated at http://musicbrainz.org/edit/26842503 where the > definition of a free download came up. > > Is "pay what you want" (guiltware) considered free as

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-310: New work attributes

On Mar 24, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Calvin Walton wrote: > On Sun, 2014-03-23 at 09:47 -0500, Rachel Dwight wrote: >> On Mar 23, 2014, at 9:38 AM, Ulrich Klauer wrote: >> >>> Rachel Dwight >>> >>>> We recently added the option to add additional attrib

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-310: New work attributes

On Mar 23, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Ulrich Klauer wrote: > Rachel Dwight: > >> We have JASRAC IDs in the attributes bar now. It’s only fair that >> other collection societies get the same. > > That is quite a strange argument ... > > For JASRAC, t

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-310: New work attributes

On Mar 23, 2014, at 9:38 AM, Ulrich Klauer wrote: > Rachel Dwight > >> We recently added the option to add additional attributes to works, >> one of which was JASRAC work ID. As many of you all know, several >> other collection societies have repertoires of their

[mb-style] RFC STYLE-310: New work attributes

We recently added the option to add additional attributes to works, one of which was JASRAC work ID. As many of you all know, several other collection societies have repertoires of their own and special IDs for works. Below is a list of attributes with examples: ASCAP ID (example: 490604183 for

Re: [mb-style] RFC: Add IMVDb to other databases whitelist

On Mar 21, 2014, at 8:20 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 3:15 AM, daniel. wrote: > This expired and got no votes. I'm new to this; what am I supposed do? > > Wait for a +1. It does seem fairly decent though, so here's your +1 ;) (as > other-dbs for now IMO) He

Re: [mb-style] RFV STYLE-298: New packaging type: Brilliant Box

On Mar 19, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Tom Crocker wrote: > On 19 March 2014 13:04, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren > wrote: > I still don't know what the point of the Packaging field is at all myself to > be honest, it's always felt pointless to me > > > Packaging can be pretty useful for distinguishing

Re: [mb-style] RFV STYLE-298: New packaging type: Brilliant Box

On Mar 19, 2014, at 8:04 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Marko wrote: > RFV expected expiration date: 2014-03-19. > > This proposal is for adding new packaging type named “Standard Width Double > Disc Jewel Case” > > The type name sounds absolutely d

Re: [mb-style] RFC add maniadb to other database whitelist

I don’t know if this will go through, as the site appears to be only in Korean. I considered adding Baidu Baike a while back but held off for this reason (it’s not available in English). On Mar 17, 2014, at 8:17 AM, jesus2099 wrote: > Very good korean music DB, example : artist > http://www.man

Re: [mb-style] RFC-STYLE-273. New relationship attribute : “unsure”

On Mar 6, 2014, at 9:41 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 3/6/2014 9:17 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: >> On 3/6/2014 5:33 AM, jesus2099 wrote: >>> could be called unsure, unverified, etc. I let the english speakers find the >>> appropriate work. >>> >>> for cases like « The song is sometimes co-credited to Re

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-298: New packaging type: Brilliant Box

his Brilliant Box as well. > > > 2014-03-04 8:25 GMT+01:00 Rachel Dwight : > +1 > > On Mar 3, 2014, at 5:31 PM, Marko wrote: > >> RFC expected expiration date: 2014-03-11. >> >> I would love to see Brilliant Box as a new packaging type. It’s like a Jewel >&

Re: [mb-style] RFC-STYLE-296. remove bogus attribute work-work version TRANSLATED

On Mar 3, 2014, at 3:54 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote: > 2014-03-03 22:23 GMT+01:00 symphonick : > It sounds like the old mb-classic "releases vs. facts". > > Right :-) > > > We can't (IMO) put incorrect information @ mb-work level. > Right now I don't have any ideas except use the release a

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-298: New packaging type: Brilliant Box

+1 On Mar 3, 2014, at 5:31 PM, Marko wrote: > RFC expected expiration date: 2014-03-11. > > I would love to see Brilliant Box as a new packaging type. It’s like a Jewel > Case from the outside, but inside it fits 2 discs, as it has extra plastic > piece inside, that can hold 1 disc on each si

Re: [mb-style] RFC-STYLE-296. remove bogus attribute work-work version TRANSLATED

On Mar 3, 2014, at 1:57 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 9:51 PM, SwissChris wrote: > So if that means an additional line in the guidelines, saying "Do only use if > it really is a pretty close translation, otherwise use simply ''version of''" > I could probably

Re: [mb-style] RFC-STYLE-296. remove bogus attribute work-work version TRANSLATED

On Mar 1, 2014, at 4:03 AM, symphonick wrote: > How are you going to connect & separate between translations & different > lyrics without a specific relationship? > ex. Melody X with lyrics A in language B / Melody X with lyrics A translated > to language C / Melody X with lyrics D in language

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-294: Add Wikimedia Commons to the score whitelist

+1 On Feb 25, 2014, at 5:48 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > While it's certainly nowhere near IMSLP in amount of scores, Commons does > have some, and being in there requires free licenses so they should be safe > to link. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:National_anthems >

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC (no ticket yet): Plagiarism relationship type

On Feb 19, 2014, at 4:39 AM, Staffan Vilcans wrote: > > Rachel Dwight wrote: >> I just thought this up: >> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKazeneko/Plagiarism_Relationship_Type >> I know of dozens of works where one party has claimed another artist's >

Re: [mb-style] RFV-293: 'has show notes at' relationship

Show notes are different from reviews, primarily (in my experience) because they're written by the artists themselves or someone close to the artist. Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 19, 2014, at 7:40 AM, jesus2099 wrote: > > I have looked at the examples, why not using the current *review* AR ? >

[mb-style] Pre-RFC (no ticket yet): Plagiarism relationship type

I just thought this up: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKazeneko/Plagiarism_Relationship_Type I know of dozens of works where one party has claimed another artist's work ripped off his or her own. I even made a folksonomy tag in an effort to track them all: https://musicbrainz.org/tag/r

Re: [mb-style] RFC-293: 'has show notes at' relationship

+1 I see these a lot with NPR podcasts. On Feb 8, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Wieland Hoffmann wrote: > Hallo ich: >> Hello world, >> >> I hereby propose to add a 'has show notes at' for releases [...] > ^ relationship > -- > Wieland > > ___

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-285/2: more specific artist types for classical groups

On Jan 26, 2014, at 3:20 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: > Now that the orchestra attribute is going away (thankfully) we should store > this data where it belongs: on the artists. I would like to add a few new > artist types to more clearly store this kind of info. > > After the feedba

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-288: allow "tribute" artist-artist AR

On Jan 24, 2014, at 7:16 AM, th1rtyf0ur wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 01:54:56AM -0800, jesus2099 wrote: >> A cover band (BUCK-TICK) is something else, they do covers of several >> artists, it’s not particularly in tribute to all those artists but to >> have material to perform without writin

Re: [mb-style] RFV STYLE-282: add "mini-album" primary type

This is an RFV, so that may qualify as a veto. On Jan 23, 2014, at 1:18 AM, Kuno Woudt wrote: > Hello, > > On 01/23/2014 02:05 AM, Alex Mauer wrote: >> On 1/22/2014 10:03 AM, Kuno Woudt wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> On 01/22/2014 04:33 PM, Mihai Spinei wrote: Got a couple of +1s for mini-albu

[mb-style] RFV STYLE-280: Personal label relationship type

OK, I got 1 +1, so this should be good enough for an RFV. Ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-280 Wiki: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKazeneko/Personal_label_relationship_type Expires on 2014-1-22___ MusicBrainz-style mailing

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-286: "Radio Drama" Work type

On Jan 18, 2014, at 1:08 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 1/17/2014 8:27 PM, Rachel Dwight wrote: >> I think “Radio Drama” or “Audio Drama” would work best, as I’ve seen >> “Radio Play” used to mean general airplay. > > I would definitely prefer "Audio drama", since ma

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-286: "Radio Drama" Work type

On Jan 17, 2014, at 8:06 PM, Duke Yin wrote: > My intended use case for the "Radio Drama" Work type is driven by Japanese > CDs consisting of 2 Songs and 1-2 Audio Dramas, which is a fairly common > release type in Japanese animation goods. My interpretation of > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-286: "Radio Drama" Work type

+1 I think I have a few of these lying around on cassette. On Jan 17, 2014, at 6:03 PM, Duke Yin wrote: > Ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-286 > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_drama > > This RFC expires on January 25, 12:01 AM UTC. > __

Re: [mb-style] RFV STYLE-227 Add new artist type "Character"

Presumably they’ll still be labeled as Group for now. We’ll have to tag them as consisting of Characters or other non-human artists. On Jan 9, 2014, at 3:18 AM, jesus2099 wrote: > What about fictional bands ? > > > > - > PATATE12 > jesus2099 > GOLD MASTER KING > FAKE E-MAIL ADDRE

[mb-style] RFC STYLE-280: Personal label relationship type

Ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-280 Wiki: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:HibiscusKazeneko/Personal_label_relationship_type A lot of artists have personal labels that handle the rights to their works. Some even have their own release labels (e.g. Michael Jackson and MJJ Musi

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC: Make instruments entities

Would specific instrument makes and models have to be implemented as aliases? Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 2, 2014, at 1:03 PM, "Frederik \"Freso\" S. Olesen" > wrote: > > Den 02-01-2014 15:02, Frederic Da Vitoria skrev: >> I don't know where what is the current situation about languages in th

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-278: Add "Stadium/Arena" as place type

+1 Would Nippon Budokan fall under this classification even though it’s hardly ever used for sports nowadays? On Jan 1, 2014, at 8:06 AM, Maurits wrote: > Sounds logical enough to have them. +1 > > Op woensdag 1 januari 2014 13:18:15, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren schreef: >> Stadiums and sports a

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

+1 I seem to remember seeing a recording of THE ALFEE performing at the church on the Meiji Gakuin University campus. On Jan 1, 2014, at 7:12 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote: > 2014/1/1 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren > We have over 50 churches already, and with so much classical music being > record

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-227 Add new artist type "Character"

lue in being able to mark Groups as "fictional"/"composed of > Character members" - it's still a group.) How about groups like Spinal Tap, whose members are all real? > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Rachel Dwight > wrote: > -1 > Sorry, but Char

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-227 Add new artist type "Character"

-1 Sorry, but Characters can be individuals or groups. I initially proposed for there to be an option to toggle “Fictional” onto an artist, but everyone here pooh-poohed it. On Dec 30, 2013, at 12:39 PM, Calvin Walton wrote: > (Dedicated to Nikki, who finally bugged me enough that I sent this.)

Re: [mb-style] Pre-RFC: Make instruments entities

On Dec 28, 2013, at 5:15 AM, Maurits wrote: > Hello, > > There is a ticket* in the bug tracker on turning instruments into > entities, but it doesn't seem to have been discussed on this mailing > list yet. > Obviously this would be a big feature and a schema change, and we'd have > to discus

Re: [mb-style] RFC. revert “several labels on release” NGS feature

On Dec 12, 2013, at 11:27 PM, Jazzy Jarilith wrote: > I agree there is no need to have both a parent label and a sublabel on a > given release but what about joint releases? > > - 1 Exactly. I’ve seen this on a lot of Toshiba EMI/EMI Music Japan releases (not just by THE ALFEE); there’ll be

Re: [mb-style] RFC. revert “several labels on release” NGS feature

It IS a very bad idea. As I’ve stated ad nauseam, all of THE ALFEE’s releases from 2003 to 2013 used both the EXPRESS and Virgin Records imprints at the same time. See for yourself: http://musicbrainz.org/release/46c44b15-21ab-4851-aeab-76c852705a2a/cover-art On Dec 12, 2013, at 3:17 AM, Staffa

Re: [mb-style] RFC STYLE-272: Subgroup Relationship Type

+1. I’ve wanted this for a long time. Just to clarify: this doesn’t apply to spinoffs, does it? On Dec 9, 2013, at 12:56 AM, Duke Yin wrote: > We have a "person is a member of group" relationship. Given how this > relationship has been (incorrectly?) used in the past to attempt "group is a >

Re: [mb-style] Translated titles

I’m keeping a bit of an observer’s eye on this thread because I see some parallels with some releases I work with. Japanese bands Yellow Magic Orchestra and P-MODEL often used both Japanese and English titles for their works and recordings, listing them side-by-side on the release packaging. I

[mb-style] "Purchase for mail-order" blacklist

Recently we've been refining "purchase for download" URL relationships and a few days ago, it occurred to me that purchase for mail-order URL relationships are largely unregulated. I remember a long time ago on another site some people were exchanging names of websites to purchase music. Several we

Re: [mb-style] RFC-266: Add a place Part of Relationship Type

+1 here too. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 1, 2013, at 1:26 PM, "Frederik \"Freso\" S. Olesen" > wrote: > > Den 01-11-2013 19:16, Wieland Hoffmann skrev: >> I propose to add the `part of` relationship type for places to link >> places which are part of other places (for example concert halls in

Re: [mb-style] RFV STYLE-244: New media types

Looks great :) Now to fix all the releases that used these media types... Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 29, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren > wrote: > > These have finally been added. If something looks wrong please shout at me. > ___ > M

  1   2   3   4   >