[mb-style] MusicBrainz-style Digest, Vol 74, Issue 21
jshoj at mindless.com
Wed Jun 8 00:18:25 UTC 2011
> I don't think this would be abandoning VolumeNumberStyle, merely
> applying it to the ReleaseGroup level only, not to the Release. The
> benefit would be applying a consistent system to editing, Release = as
> printed, ReleaseGroup = normalized. One of the problems of MB is the
> number of rules we have to know in order to properly edit. Those rules
> were necessary because we had only one level. Some of those rules are
> being abandoned because NGS offers other ways to enter information
> than the Release and Track titles. Other rules should still be kept
> (for example as long as we don't have a specific field to enter the
> volume number, we'll need a VolumeNumberStyle), but we don't have to
> apply them to all level. Now that we have Releases and Release Groupe
> and Recordings and Works, we can apply the normalization to some
> levels and use a simpler input method for other levels.
I think it would be really good if some folks step back and try to
articulate exactly what they think "use what's printed on the cover"
means - because I don't think anyone really means always use *exactly*
what is printed on the cover. So, we need to understand what people
really do mean. Do they mean:
- Maintain all typos and misspellings?
- If the artist's name is spelled wrong, still enter it that way?
- If the wrong artist is listed entirely for a track, still put that in
- If the tracklist is printed in a different order than what is on that
actual release, still enter that?
- Don't normalize:
- Series/Volume/Part/etc. number style
- Extra title information
- e.g., if curly brackets are used, don't change them to parens?
- Use "inst." instead of expanding?
- Medley style?
- e.g. if the cover separates the tunes by semicolons, don't change
- Other things?
Once we whittle the list down, we can address each one - assuming it's a
manageable number of things.
I've said this before, but just to repeat:
> That being said, I still think there are plenty of applications of the
> "Use what's
> on the cover" guideline beyond the level of capitalization. A good
> example that
> comes to mind is the Rogers and Hart tune "Bewitched", which according
> to ASCAP is
> the correct name of the work. Yet, many - if not most - covers use
> the common
> title of "Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered". With the old paradigm,
> we had
> the competing interests of consistent original data and artist intent
> resulted, I think, in an inconsistent application to this particular
> item. We
> don't have that problem in NGS, so there shouldn't be any more issue.
> This could also be very useful in traditional Celtic music where
> sometimes the
> same tune is known by multiple names. Or, when a medley of tunes is
> listed as
> only the name of the medley on some covers, but by the underlying
> tunes on others.
I never thought we were going to use this as a way to get away from some
of the old guidelines.
More information about the MusicBrainz-style