[mb-style] Cantata and movement names names: where ?

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2006/12/6, Leiv Hellebø <leivhe at broadpark.no>:
> 3) Whatever the eventual form of the change, it might go a long way to
> put a common structure to track titles for the vast majority of
> classical music. (Assuming what is done for cantatas will also apply for
> masses and passions (and more?). See below for a notable exception.) For
> all of these, and concertos, symphonies, the beginnings of a rigid
> formalism can then be seen emerging. A quasi example shown here:
>
> TrackTitle
>    should be: WorkTitle Colon PartTitle
>
> WorkTitle
>     should be: GenreTitle [ Key ] Comma CatalogNumber [ CommonName ]
>
> PartTitle
>     should be: [ Subsection COMMA ] PartNumber DOT [ExtraInfo] Name
>
> GenreTitle
>     should be: Symphony | [ Instrument ] Concerto | Cantata
>
> etc.
>
> Implementing such a structure might in time enable server side or client
> side validation of edits: No more forgetting to leave out the dot in
> CatalogNumber! No more incorrect case for German keys!
>
> In addition (here I'm out on a ledge because I don't know much about the
> scripting features mentioned above), my guess is that scripting for
> adding quotes, translating ubiquitous stuff such as "Symphonie" to
> "Symphony", "Kantate" to "Cantata" from ReleaseLanguage to
> UserPreferredLanguage, removing unwanted information (VoiceIndication,
> or CatalogNumber, or even the whole WorkName), using Arabics in stead of
> Romans for those who prefer them etc. will be very much helped by having
> such an easy structure to navigate.
>
> A further benefit, I believe, is that a simplified version of the
> eventual formalism can help editors not used to adding classical
> releases find their way around: It directs the thought, so it will be
> easy to check that all points are indeed in place, and your vote will
> most likely go through. Maybe navigating the CSG could be simplified a
> lot by having stuff follow a simplified form of the eventual structure:
> Click the link "CatalogNumber" to see valid varieties and related info, etc.
>
> (Putting difficult stuff in parentheses: I am sure there are many things
> I haven't thought of, I'm fairly new here, and there is at least one I
> haven't thought through: What to require for AddReleases such as "The
> Best of Vivaldi". It seems overkill to require much detail for such a
> release, as people with this disc might very well be utterly
> disinterested in the particular RVs, type of concerto etc.)
>
> Finally, as mentioned in a parentheses above: This does not apply to all
> classical music in MB. Opera requires the quasi definition above to go
> more like:
>
> TrackTitle:
>    should be : OperaTitle | AllOthersTitle
>
> OperaTitle
>    should be :
>     Name COMMA SceneInformation Colon [ExtraInfo] Name
>
> (etc.)
>
> AllOthersTitle
>    should be : WorkTitle Colon PartTitle
> (etc. as earlier)
>
> Although perfectly usable, it distorts what's common between Operas and
> AllOthers, not helping people keeping the structure in their head, and
> making it harder, I guess, for the developers of software working
> on/with tags.
>
> As you can guess, I'm all for changing the CSG for opera as well.

I agree to the principle, but I believe this should start a whole new
thread in itself!

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria