[mb-users] Displaying recording & work relationships on release pages

[Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren]

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Oliver Charles
<oliver.g.charles.work at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm currently working on a few tickets which involve displaying more
> relationships on the main release page. There are 2 options, display
> relationships inline with the tracklist (as it was previously done),
> and a new option is to summarize relationships after the tracklist, in
> a more "scan-able" format. I've implemented both options, to various
> degrees, but both seem to have pros and cons and a decision couldn't
> easily be reached over in IRC.
>
> Firstly, some examples.
>
> You can see the relationship-inline approach on test.musicbrainz.org
> at the moment, [1] for example. On some releases, such as Play With
> the Changes, there is a vast amount of information and it becomes
> *very* noisy. So the alternative solution is to summarize
> relationships, which I've done in [2] (screenshot). However, it's been
> argued it's hard to use [2] to find missing information on a specific
> track. Personally, I think you still have access to this information,
> you just have to click the track.
>
> In my opinion, I see [2] as having more potential. My plans for this are:
>
>    * To include some information inline in the tracklist. For
> example, links to works and recordings (remix, cover, etc) would be
> good to have here, because they only tend to appear once
>
>    * Include a summary of instruments on the release. This would be a
> new section 'Instruments', with the same type of table, except each
> row group would be an instrument, and the contents would be all
> performers of that instrument. See [3] for a plain text mockup.
>
> I'd like to know which direction people want me to go on this. Maybe
> you think [2] is a horrible solution, and can never be workable (if
> so, tell me and explain why!). Or maybe [1] was a horrible idea for
> MusicBrainz, and you're glad to see it removed. Either way, I'd like
> to hear your opinion.
>
> If you need more information, please let me know.
>
> - Ollie
>
> ----
>
> 1: http://test.musicbrainz.org/release/861c7d46-f3eb-4800-8eee-ea3e3df0f04f
> 2: http://imgur.com/y9pQi
> 3: https://gist.github.com/1170712

As an (hyper)active editor I find [1] much more useful, as it allows
to easily see what is missing / wrongly entered without having to
decipher a huge list and see if everything applies to the right track.
That being said, the font size there is way too big: here's an example
of bitmap's userscript for this, that has a much nicer size / coloring
IMO.
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4125/arontracksman.png
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-users mailing list
> MusicBrainz-users at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
>



-- 
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren