[mb-style] Agree, and more detailed proposal [was: Re: Composition/Performer/Production ARs at Release or Track level? - PROPOSAL]

[Jim DeLaHunt]

Hi, folks:

I had just come strongly to Brian's Viewpoint #2 when this thread broke out. 

I support his proposal, but I'd like to reword it (below):


Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> 
> ...
> Viewpoint 2:
>    A release and its tracks are two entirely separate considerations.
>    An AR added at the release level is valid if is says something about at
> least one of the tracks on the release. ....
> 
> =========================
> 
> Proposal:
> 
>   Release level ARs are not now or ever to be inherited to tracks.
>   Release level ARs are allowed to be, and always ought to be viewed as
> "fuzzy".
>   However, track level (and for later, track master ARs) are *never* to be
> fuzzy.
>   Finally, apply ARs to every track you can, if you have the info - ie:
> from
> this point on, if an AR applies to all tracks, it ought to be applied to
> all
> tracks, and not just to the release.
> 
> =========================
> 
> (Any time I say AR here I mean performance and production ARs, not the
> ones
> that inherently have nothing to do with tracks, such as the coverart AR.)
> ...
> 

I think the word "fuzzy" is causing trouble for some editors who want MB
data to be carefully researched and based on solid evidence. 

I also think that (who?) on this thread had a good point that some ARs don't
really apply to Tracks, they apply to Track Masters. I think we should carry
this discussion forward to Track Masters, as if they already were part of
the structure, and work out the implications. I think we should also do this
for Musical Compositions, which many people agree are sorely needed, and
which I hope will arrive soon.

Thus I support David's proposal, and suggest the following more complicated
but precise wording. (Each point numbered J-1..J-13, so you can refer to
them in discussion.)

J-1: A Release is an entity that exists separately from the Tracks it
contains. An AR can describe a Release without describing the Tracks of the
Release. The "provided photography on" AR is an example. 

J-2: Brief Definition: a Track is one rendition of a Track Master. Each
Track has exactly one Track Master, but each Track Master can be rendered by
multiple Tracks. A Track Master contains performances of one or more Musical
Compositions. A Musical Composition is an entity that exists separately from
any performances of it.

J-3: An AR describes at most one of a Track or a Track Master or a Release
or a Musical Composition. (Some ARs describe none of these, e.g.
Artist-Artist or Artist-URL ARs. They don't apply in this discussion.) As
part of this proposal, we need to go through each AR and be specific about
which entity it describes. Some ARs may need to be split if they say
different things about Tracks vs Releases.

J-4: An AR that describes a Track *should* be attached to each individual
Track record that it applies to, if there is solid evidence that ties the AR
to that Track. If it means an AR is attached to every Track in a Release,
that's fine. Similarly, an AR that describes a Track Master should be
applied to each individual Track Master entity, and an AR that describes a
Musical Composition should be applied to each individual Musical Composition
entity; if there is solid evidence.
  
J-5: An AR that describes a Track or Track Master or Musical Composition
*may* be applied to a Release. This formally means that this AR applies to
some, at least one and perhaps all, Tracks of the Release. Applying a such
an AR to a Release is appropriate if there is solid evidence which ties the
AR to the Release, but which does not specify to which Tracks (or Track
Masters or Musical Compositions) the AR applies.  

J-6: If you find a Track or Track Master or Musical Composition AR applied
to a Release, then you must not conclude that the AR *certainly* applies to
each Track (or Track Master or Musical Composition) of the Release. You must
conclude that it *might* apply to any or all of them, and use that
conclusion appropriately for your task. For example, if you are a tagger,
you might put the AR information into an MP3 tag, but marked with a "?".

J-7: If you are summarising information about a Release, if it is
appropriate for your task, it is correct to include AR information from the
Tracks, Track Masters, and Musical Compositions of that Release in the
summary. For instance, if you are generating a report about the Performers
on a Release, it is correct to list all Artists mentioned in Performer ARs
for all Track Masters and Tracks.  If you find that in all the Musical
Compositions of a Release there is only one Composer mentioned, it is
correct to report that as the "Composer of the Release".

J-8: An AR that describes a Track Master may be attached to a Track. (Right
now it *always* will, by necessity, since there are no Track Master entities
in the MB structure.)  This means that the AR applies to the Track Master
associated with the Track. If there is no explicit Track Master entity, then
the Track Master is implicit, and the Track is its placeholder. Where a
Track Master or Musical Composition record for the track exists, it is
always correct to remove relevant ARs from the Track and apply them to the
Track Master or Musical Composition entity.

J-9: An AR that describes a Musical Composition may be attached to a Track
or Track Master. (Right now it *always* will, by necessity, since there are
no Track Master or Musical Composition entities in the MB structure.)  This
means that the AR applies to some, at least one and perhaps all, of the
Musical Composition(s) associated with that Track Master. If there are no
explicit Musical Composition entities, they they are implicit, and the Track
Master (or Track) are the placeholder for them. Where a single Musical
Composition entity for the Track Master exists, it is always correct to
remove relevant ARs from the Track and apply them to the Musical Composition
entity. Where multiple Musical Composition entities for the Track Master
exist, then it requires editor judgment to move the AR from Track or Track
Master to Musical Composition. 

J-10: Transition task: Review all Track and Release ARs and assign them to
exactly one of a Track or a Track Master or a Release or a Musical
Composition. Revise the AR description to be precise about what it is
describing. If needed, split ARs which presently mean one thing for Track
and another thing for Release.

J-11: Transition task: Review all Track or Track Master or Composition ARs
that are attached to Release entities, and make a judgement about whether
they should be migrated to Tracks.  It would be helpful to have reports and
tools to make this easier. It would be nice to let editors who added ARs get
first crack at judging them.  It will be important to have a convention for
recording judgements that an AR belongs at the Release level.

J-12: When Track Master entities join the MB structure, it should be a
fairly mechanical operation to migrate Track Master and Musical Composition
ARs from Track to Track Master entities. It's mechanical because each Track
has exactly one Track Master. Track Master and Musical Composition ARs which
are attached to Release entities at this stage can stay there, if an editor
has judged that they belong at the Release level.

J-13: When Musical Composition entities join the MB structure, most Track
Masters will have exactly one Musical Composition. For these, it should be a
fairly mechanical operation to migrate Musical Composition ARs from Track
Master to Musical Composition entities.  However, there will be a transition
task to determine whether a Track Master contains one or multiple Musical
Composition entities. If multiple, there is a judgement task to decide to
which Musical Composition each such AR belongs.  There will probably be some
judgement tasks to resolve conflicting ARs migrated to one Musical
Composition from multiple Track Masters.  Again, Musical Composition ARs
which are attached to Release entities at this stage can stay there, if an
editor has judged that they belong at the Release level.


Whew.

Comments?

     --Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Composition-Performer-Production-ARs-at-Release-or-Track-level----PROPOSAL-tp14572834s2885p14593957.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.