[mb-style] Composition/Performer/Production ARs at Release or Track level? - PROPOSAL

[Jim DeLaHunt]

Lauri Watts wrote:
> 
> .... We can't accomodate both points of view, and trying to is just
> resulting in a mess.
> 
> We just have to pick one, and document it _clearly_.  I don't
> understand why everyone is so against writing down clear rules, when
> not doing so results in all this ambiguity.
> 

I agree with Lauri wholeheartedly on this point.  As a newbie, I love the
what MB is trying to do, but the ambiguity in the Wiki and docs drives me
nuts.  In another post I've tried proposing some clear rules.


Lauri Watts wrote:
> 
> ....
>> I was on the verge of writing this down in
>> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ArtistRoleInheritance .  I'm a newly-arrived
>> MB
>> contributor. That page was very influential for me. Now I see that it
>> misled
>> me.  I think that it's important that it be rewritten to reflect whatever
>> our new consensus turns out to be.
> 
> We have to actually _have_ a consensus before running around editing
> pages....
> 

I agree that we have to have a consensus before editing pages that are style
guidelines. ArtistRoleInheritance, it turns out, doesn't forthrightly make
that claim. It has some analysis, and a _proposed_ style guideline. (The
proposal dates from 2005-07-23 11:27:33, and it's still only a proposal.) It
also has both CategoryStyle and CategoryProposedStyle tags.

What I was going to write was a counter-proposal.

In other collaboratively-edited complex works of data I've worked on, I've
seen good results from running around editing _discussion_ pages -- as a way
of distilling consensus, and getting clear rules written down.

  --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-tp14572834s2885p14594027.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.