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

Kerensky97 kerensky97 at xterra101.com
Thu Oct 12 19:03:54 UTC 2006 

You're right that somebody is bound to misinterpret the definition no matter
what we put in there, but next to "release status" when making a change is
the "help" button that takes you to the page that defines releases status
with a detailed definition of what should be put in there. 
http://musicbrainz.org/doc/ReleaseAttribute
Because even if we do use Transl(iter)ation as the status, somebody is going
to enter their own transliteration before the official release gets into the
database and call it official.  Then somebody will follow up with the
official version and label it Transl(iter)ation.  But as long as we have the
voting system in place and the definition spelled out in the wiki documents
we should be ok no matter what the name it.  If somebody uses it wrong we
can vote no, point and laugh, then show them the correct answer.

I'm more concerned with people setting up the AR then neglecting to change
Release status to "official" or "alt/virt/trans".  I'm not sure it it's
feasable to put a Release Status edit on the same page as the AR edit and
make people do both at the same time (there may be problems if the release
status is already defined).  Perhaps under the AR edit we could just put a
line telling the editor to change the release status  based off where they
got the transl(iter)ation and have a link to the definitions so they know
what to do.

-Dustin (Kerensky97)


Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> 
> I think we all agree on what you saw. And as long as we stay in that
> vision, it seems work. But remember most of the users who will add
> releases will not have read this thread or the wiki page explaining
> what the different ReleaseTypes mean, they will enter their new cd,
> and when asked to fill the ReleaseType, they will drop down the combo.
> What they will do then will depend on how explicit and clear will be
> the terms we present them. What would the average do with a "Virtual"
> release? What if he thinks "Virtual, cool, so what I am entering now
> is virtual, it doesn't really exist, I can enter anything I want"?
> What if he enters a Virtual release without a Transl(iter)ation AR
> (this is bound to happen)? If you think that these are ok, fine, let
> us go with "Virtual"? Or Alternate. But so far nobody has told me what
> would happen if the new type was used for something else than
> Transl(iter)ation. And if we don't choose a more restricting term, we
> won't be able to object to users doing so.
> 
> Once again, I am not SAYING this is wrong. I am ASKING: is this wrong?
> If not, wnat would be the consequences. If so, what can we do against
> it?
> 
> 2006/10/12, Kerensky97 <kerensky97 at xterra101.com>:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Musicbrainz-style mailing list
>> Musicbrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
>> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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#a6782563
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Musicbrainz-style mailing list