[mb-style] RFC-327: Featured Artists

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosarevok at gmail.com
Sat Jul 23 10:10:40 UTC 2011


On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Ryan Torchia <anarchyriot at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Nikki <aeizyx at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> jacobbrett wrote:
>> > I don't mean to set the discussion back, but perhaps an additional field
>> > for
>> > featured artists (and other, non-equal/non-collab. artist credits) could
>> > be
>> > introduced to the schema? I _do_ love semantics. :P
>>
>> Semantics is what relationships are for... Artist credits don't even
>> tell you who did what.
>>
>> Nikki
>>
>
> When thinking about the issue with where to put "featured" artists on
> recordings and tracks, I thought of something that might be ridiculously
> stupid: Maybe recordings shouldn't have artists at all?  Or to put it less
> radically: what if what we currently label as artist in Releases and
> Recordings was converted a Performance AR for Recordings, with "primary" as
> one of the options?  We'd basically enter it the same way we currently do,
> only it'd automatically be converted into a primary credit (as would current
> recordings). If you think about the three structures we currently have:
> Works don't have an artist because all the involved parties are broken down
> into objective, descriptive roles via ARs.  Releases cram all the absolute
> essential information into Artists and Titles (and maybe Release Title),
> because every mp3 player expects it, and because most releases are
> structured that way.  Recordings really don't need to contain an Artist
> field; they can focus on descriptive roles, which can be used to dynamically
> create Artist fields based on user preference.  This might also solve some
> of the Classical issues, if users were allowed to choose whether the Artist
> field was populated from the primary performer on the Recording or the
> composer of the Work, or some combination.  (Obviously there's still a lot
> to figure out here, but I'm just brainstorming.)

I would like this. But! The easiest way for a transition into this
would be to have feat. in the artist credit for now, so the link to
the entity is there and can be auto-transformed into a relationship if
we decide to ;)

> --Torc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-style mailing list
> MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>



-- 
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren



More information about the MusicBrainz-style mailing list