[mb-style] RFV4: Writer Relationship Type

[Jeroen Latour]

Brian, sure, if you can help with the wiki-markup.

Paul, fine, please consider this a RFC with the same expiration date. I'm on
the road; could someone send out a RFC mail?

- Jeroen

Op 24 dec. 2010 om 19:04 heeft Brian Schweitzer <
brian.brianschweitzer at gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:

I think you're right Paul.  However, if I may, I'll read this "RFV" as an
"RFC", and give that RFC the +1 it needs to move forward.

Jeroen, all looks good.  One request, though, (and I think I'm even the one
who originally put it there when I did the examples stuff for you :P)...
 Would you mind if the "(a.k.a. the Prefer Specific Relationship Types
guideline)" text were dropped from 5.1's section header?  It makes the TOC
too long for the template, but also it potentially could be confused as
*being* the Prefer... guideline, rather than simply showing how
the Prefer... guideline would be interpreted.  :)  Otherwise, all seems good
to me.

Brian

On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Paul C. Bryan <email at pbryan.net> wrote:

> I'm not sure what discussions you are referring to.
>
> From what I can see, this was last published as an RFC was in October,
> and underwent various revisions without subsequent RFCs.
>
> When a substantive change occurs to a proposal, my understanding is the
> process is to re-submit as an RFC, let it undergo discussion (incl. +1),
> revise and re-submit (if necessary) for +1, and when said discussion
> results in consensus, then RFV should not reasonably result in a veto.
>
> The process you appear to be following is
> RFC-discuss-RFV-veto-discuss-revise-RFV-veto-discuss-etc. Am I off-base
> in some way?
>
> Paul
>
> On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 17:45 +0100, Jeroen Latour wrote:
> > Everyone involved in the latest discussions agreed with moving to RFV.
> > Do you feel we need a round of RFC first?
> >
> > - Jeroen
> >
> > Op 24 dec. 2010 om 17:34 heeft "Paul C. Bryan" <email at pbryan.net> het
> > volgende geschreven:
> >
> > > Point of order: shouldn't this be an RFC?
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 16:56 +0100, Jeroen Latour wrote:
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Step 2 of 2. Now that the Prefer Specific Relationship Types guideline
> > >> is official, I am resubmitting the Writer AR proposal for RFV.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Changes since last time.
> > >>     1. Moved most of the guidelines governing when to use the
> > >>        specific types to the new Prefer Specific Relationship Types
> > >>        guideline.
> > >>     2. Added a clear reference to the Preferer Specific Relationship
> > >>        Type guideline.
> > >>     3. Added many examples, illustrating the effect of the Preferer
> > >>        Specific Relationship Type guideline.
> > >> The proposal is available
> > >> at: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:Writer_Relationship_Type
> > >> Because of the holidays, this RFV will expire on Tuesday, January 5.
> > >> That should give everyone plenty of time.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I hope everyone enjoys the holidays, and for those in a culture that
> > >> don't celebrate any holidays, I hope that you enjoy the peace and
> > >> quiet on the style mailinglist. :-)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Jeroen
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> MusicBrainz-style mailing list
> > >> MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
> > >> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > MusicBrainz-style mailing list
> > > MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
> > > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > MusicBrainz-style mailing list
> > MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
> > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-style mailing list
> MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/attachments/20101224/69817c3a/attachment-0001.htm