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

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:18 AM, David K. Gasaway <dave at gasaway.org> wrote:

> On 2 Mar 2008 at 22:59, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>
> > I guess we will have to create the appropriate work listing. So an
> > actual work (in the outside MB sense) may be represented by several
> > overlapping work listings.
>
> Let's see if I understand correctly.  If a movement is split across
> tracks, we will enter work list entries for the movement parts?  I
> think the theme and variation discussions earlier illustrate just how
> tricky this can be.  I've also encountered recordings where the tracks
> transitioned in a more-or-less arbitrary place.


I don't see any solution against this (short of burning every copy of such
releases :-D ) This problem is always going to happen, even in NGS. So yes,
we'll certainly have to create strange partitions of the works.


Also, I assume that we'll keep the full movement work list item - as
> opposed to requiring that a track AR to all of the movement parts in
> the case that the track is a single movement.  Which also means well
> need work list items for entire works - lots of recordings have
> sonatas, symphonies, etc. as single tracks.  Suddenly, we have a
> bloated list with lots of variations on the same work.  Ideas how to
> manage the bloat?


Wiki again. The nice thing about the wiki idea is that we can use the
pre-NGS time to test different ways to present the data and when NGS comes
we will have a better idea of how it should be done.

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/attachments/20080303/0fc765d8/attachment.htm