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

[Sami Sundell]

Brian Schweitzer wrote:

Since it was suggested I should read this discussion, I'm going through 
it slowly :P

> I guess it depends on how we define "work".  Is a "work" a unique
> composition?  If so, then there ought to not be, imho, a listing also
> in the covering artist's workslist.  Or is a "work" simply an
> indication that an artist has played a song?  Then it would appear in
> that covering artist's workslist.
> 
> Personally, I think the first is the cleaner - and better - solution.

I disagree. I don't think "work" is just a composition, it contains 
other parts as well. I work regularly with a specific kind of covers - 
translations of foreign hits. They clearly cover some original work, but 
they also have a portion of their own work in them - at least the 
lyrics. These covers may then be covered again by some other artist.

So, for example, Bobby Goldsboro recorded Bobby Russell's song "Honey" 
<http://musicbrainz.org/track/34eac06e-9f0d-473b-9f94-d015706dd19a.html>. 
It was, in turn, covered by Markku Suominen in 1968 
<http://musicbrainz.org/track/6982f79d-ec7b-4851-ae9a-b729713e4116.html> 
and that one was covered by Raffe Leppänen in 2003 
<http://musicbrainz.org/track/f298ca18-75b5-44f9-8e91-f803d9a6c2ab.html>.

More complicated examples exist, with your choice of parodies etc. in 
between, but this one's a simple. Raffe didn't cover the original Bobby 
Russell song, the song's better known in Finland by its Finnish name and 
lyrics.

So, we'll need the "work-based" ARs on covers as well, and the covers 
may in turn be covered, so some of those ARs should be allowed between 
worklists as well as between tracks.

-- 
  Sami Sundell
  sami.sundell at kotikone.fi