[mb-style] RFC: Works lists (and other related changes then implied)

[David K. Gasaway]

I'm liking this proposal _a lot_, but I'd like to list a few concerns 
(in no particular order):

1) Language

What language will the lists use?  I touched on this in an earlier 
reply about CSGS, but I can only assume the same issues will present in 
these works lists.  I can handle English, German, Italian, and French 
well enough.  However, my head may well explode if Tchaikovsky is 
entered in Cyrillic. :)  I also get concerned that, for example, French 
has been chosen for Chopin.  I've read my share of Chopin biographies, 
but am I really to believe that none of his ouevre should be Polish?  
How about Handel and Dvorak?

2) Organization

A flat list of unordered works is going to suck _big time_.  How will 
the list be ordered on the screen?  Will we be able to group by work 
type, order by catalog number, etc.?

3) Data entry

The process of entering the ARs seems daunting as hell.  I'm going to 
assume, first off, that the ARs will not be required (to spare the 
casual editors).  I'm sure the custom DB query gurus can figure out 
some ways to ferret out the classical releases without ARs, so I'd say 
we're well covered there.  But for those that want to enter the ARs, 
how can we make the process bearable?

4) Tagging

Do we already have a plan on how to convince Picard to resolve the ARs 
and pull in the work list titles in a scriptable fashion?

5) Changing ARs

As someone already said, let's leave the existing ARs alone.  This RFC 
is a hack, and I don't see any good reason to shoehorn the existing 
data.

6) Precision (i.e., "completeness")

*Ahem* .. yeah, how about we just leave this out of the discussion for 
now?  It's an unnecessary complication.  Please?! ;)

-- 
-:-:- David K. Gasaway
-:-:- Email: dave at gasaway.org
-:-:- Web: dave.gasaway.org
-:-:- MusicBrainz: dkg