[mb-style] RFC: Transl(iteration-ation) AR (Resurrection).

[Kerensky97]

Let me try to lay it out the way I've always seen it working.  The main edit
here is the AR linking the transl(iter)ation, so we do the advanced
relationship as you usualy would, MB would ask you this:

>Pink(US) is a
>Dropdown box: (is a transl(iter)ation of)
>Pink(JP)
Then you choose between:
>Translation or Transliteration
And enter comments.

The output that now shows in the Relationship window for Pink(US) is:
>"Pink(US) has a translation: Pink(JP)"
Pink(JP) has the same thing on it's relationship field pointing back to the
US version.

Now the next edit to be made would be the Release Status to define if the
translation is official or not.
The edit would be as simple as choosing "official" for something that was
released on disc or is listed in the artists official site, or
"Alternate/Virtual/Transl(iter)ation" for a fan made or MB translator made
version that converts is to another language or eliminates unicode, etc.

I still want to lean away from Transl(iter)ation since they all technically
are transl(iter)ations of each other and we want to keep the offical
releases as offical.  Virtual or Virtual Release are good because that's
what we always called them on MB so less Wiki changes.

-Dustin (Kerensky97)


Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> 
> 2006/10/12, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg at gmail.com>:
>> 2006/10/12, Chris Bransden <chris at whenironsattack.com>:
>> > On 12/10/06, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > 2006/10/12, Chris Bransden <chris at whenironsattack.com>:
>> > > > > So seperating releases by language is not a MB recommendation,
>> > > > > separating Latin / Japanese / Cyrillic / Arabic / whatever
>> releases is
>> > > > > just the only way we can currently solve our problems. So I am
>> not
>> > > > > sure saying that using an A/T AR for Pink (US) would be a bad
>> thing.
>> > > >
>> > > > i'm not saying that either?? i'm lost again :)
>> > >
>> > > That's what I undertand from here:
>> > > > > My concern is that Pink (US) is a "Transl(iter)ation" in both
>> > > > > scenarios, so maybe using "Transl(iter)ation" as the ReleaseType
>> would
>> > > > > mean people would use it even if it was an official release.
>> > > I mean, if someone wants to say Pink (US) is a transliteration of
>> Pink
>> > > (JP), I don't see any problem. As you said, it is true. So let us let
>> > > them say it.
>> > >
>> > > But I thought this was all about an AR, so why
>> > > > > "Transl(iter)ation" as the ReleaseType
>> > > ?
>> >
>> > because i'm talking about the ReleaseType :)
>> >
>> > there are 2 levels of this. 1 is the AR between Transl(iter)ations
>> > (which we all seem to agree on), and the other is the fact that not
>> > all Transl(iter)ations are official releases, so the ones that aren't,
>> > need a ReleaseType to reflect this.
>> >
>> > If you gave an unreleased Transl(iter)ation the ReleaseType
>> > "Official", you imply that there is another release out there with
>> > this tracklist. "Bootleg" doesn't really work either, so we need a new
>> > one. The discussion is over what is a better name for the release
>> > type: Alternate/Virtual/Transl(iter)ation/...
>> >
>> > I was arguing that "Transl(iter)ation" isn't so intuitive because of
>> > the existance of Transl(iter)ations that are official. ie, they would
>> > have ReleaseType 'official' regardless of the fact that they are,
>> > incidently, Transl(iter)ations. of course they get the
>> > Transl(iter)ation AR regardless of this. does that make sense?
>>
>> It does make sense indeed, at last :-D
>>
>> Now I like "alternate" even less because I fear someone might try to
>> use it somewhere else than for Transl(iter)ations ARs, but I do feel
>> the need for another word: using the same for two different things
>> obviously leads to confusions ;-)
>>
>> --
>> Frederic Da Vitoria
> 
> Maybe we need to look at this from another angle.
> 
> When would someone need this new ReleaseType? I see two slightly
> different circumstances:
> 1- with a Transl(iter)ation AR, then I guess most terms would work.
> 2- without an AR. I mean this: Imagine I go to Japan, (I never went
> there, but almost), buy a record there as a souvenir. I choose it with
> notes in japanese as well as in english. I get back home. I want to
> enter in MB my new cd, which has not been entered yet. I will never be
> able to enter the japanese version in MB. Even if I knew how to get
> japanese characters, I wouldn't try, I would be too afraid to make
> mistakes. So I would enter the english version, but I wouldn't have
> anything to AR it to. So I'd need the ReleaseType without an AR.
> 
> This means the new ReleaseType must have a name which is meaningful
> even if no AR is used. But this word must be different from
> Transl(iter)ation.
> 
> What about Transl(iter)ated?
> 
> -- 
> Frederic Da Vitoria
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Musicbrainz-style mailing list
> Musicbrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RFV%3A--Transl%28iteration-ation%29-AR-%28Resurrection%29.-tf2390960s2885.html#a6780165
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.