[mb-style] [Clean up CSG] Release Title

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

On Feb 13, 2008 1:53 AM, Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Trying to clean out the last of the issues...
>
> Classical Release Titles:
>
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalReleaseTitleStyle
>
> Presents a structure of:
>
> MainTitle [SubTitle(s)] [VolumeNumber [VolumeTitle]] [ [?BoxNumber
> [?BoxTitle]] DiscNumber [DiscTitle]] [FeaturingArtist]
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Unresolved Problems:
>
> * Let's ignore the (artists) part here - that's what cooperaa's
> proposal is trying to address, I think.  Let's just deal with all the
> rest of it.
>
> 1) Example like
> http://musicbrainz.org/release/3261a468-953d-4dba-817e-a18e1d1e98b4.html
> where the work mentioned (Symphony 9) is actually only a single
> movement from the symphony.
>
> - My sense, there's no link, but if the title on the box was "The Best
> of Beethoven", that should be the title, and not us cramming the rest
> in - and thus, no need to worry about this.  :)
>
> 2) Example like
> http://musicbrainz.org/release/37c3923f-2e6a-4ae8-898e-8201e96fe24e.html
> where cooperaa asked on the wiki on 1/31: "Should releases that simply
> say "The 5 Piano Concertos" or "The 9 Symphonies" etc be changed to
> "Piano Concertos Nos. 5" or "Symphonies Nos. 1-9"?"
>
> - For myself, see my answer to #1 - the work clearly shows a title of
> "The 5 Piano Concertos" on the box; whereas the work titles are vague
> and CSG should provide the role of giving them a common framework, my
> sense is that to then move to the titles like these and rename them
> would be to disregard whatever amount of ArtistIntent went into those
> titles.  I'd reserve applying any CSG structuring of the title for
> those that fail to provide a title.  (eg: "Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart"
> and no title on the liner) - just glancing at that same stack of 22 or
> so classical CDs next to my desk, that single example would be the
> only one thus in need of any special "titling".
>
>  -(2) The cat-corner case would be the other CD here titled "Mozart's
> Requiem", as to whether that is considered a generic title in need of
> structure, or a proper title that ought to not be "restructured".
>
> 4) http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=6379094 - this is
> essentially the same type of point as the Requem example above: is
> "Symphony No. 9" a title or does it need "restructuring"?
>
> 5) How to list multiple works in titles?  See CSGD #25 (
>
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalStyleGuideDiscussion?highlight=%28classical%29#head-72d53d00469f041ea3a037012f514f11483a60de
> ).
>
> - I've seen most editors using "Klavierkonzerte Nos. 2-3", or
> "Klavierkonzerte No. 2-3, 5, 9"; to me this seems cleaner than any of
> the three alternatives suggested there.
>
> 6) Box sets - this is a different enough topic, I'm going to separate
> it to its own email.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> As I guess is clear, I agree with the unsigned comment in #4 of CSGD (
>
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalStyleGuideDiscussion?highlight=%28classical%29#head-4cd5244f55d642e67169686fee82aae0f638c4e8
> ) - imho, normalization of the release title should be a last resort
> where there truly is no release title.  CSG ought to provide framework
> where no common framework exists.  While this is true of works, it
> isn't true for the vast majority of release titles.  Taking a "hands
> off" approach, albeit with minor guidance (see item #5 above) also has
> the benefit of being essentially cat-corner-free.  :)
>

I have not been following the ML recently (right at the time you decided to
trigger the CSG style discussions avalanche!), but I fail to see how you
handle the numerous releases which differ only by their title.

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/attachments/20080213/f0e09d13/attachment.htm