The only thing that's really being argued is what the *official* definition of an MBID is, and for that I agree with what I've written on that page.
2010-03-01 06005, 2010
brianfreud_
What about "These relative URIs consist of just the <UUID> portion of the MBID. "?
2010-03-01 06009, 2010
navap
THe definition that has been used in common conversation has always been that MBID == UUID though.
2010-03-01 06030, 2010
navap
"I used to think something similar" - I don't anymore.
2010-03-01 06033, 2010
brianfreud_
hmmm
2010-03-01 06046, 2010
navap
What I think now is what I've edited the page to reflect.
2010-03-01 06029, 2010
navap
Don't get me wrong, I'm not proposing a change of what we call MBIDs. No way. All I did was edit the official documentation to state the official documentation. :)
2010-03-01 06051, 2010
navap
How we use the term in conversation is something else entirely.
2010-03-01 06002, 2010
brianfreud_
yeah... actually, re-reading that, I think I agree with you, if I understand... MBID is technically being defined as == the URI, even though the common terminology interpretation of MBID is that it is just the UUID part
2010-03-01 06006, 2010
nikki wonders how official is defined
2010-03-01 06030, 2010
brianfreud_
nikki: Not a talk page, not a proposal?
2010-03-01 06046, 2010
navap
And not what is used on IRC ;)
2010-03-01 06000, 2010
nikki
I mean how do we say what mbid officially is?
2010-03-01 06001, 2010
brianfreud_
Hopefully cleaning up the wiki such that anything that is one of ^^ gets marked as such, so that those can't be mistaken as official anymore
2010-03-01 06015, 2010
navap
nikki: Based on the specs that was drawn up long ago?
2010-03-01 06039, 2010
nikki
you said that the documentation was bad and used both, so now what?
The point is even clearer when you think of usages of an MBID outside of MB. A UUID doesn't mean anything "out there".
2010-03-01 06020, 2010
brianfreud_
without any context, it doesn't. Within the context of knowing that it came from MB, however, I know it is a unique identifier of a specific MB entity.
2010-03-01 06001, 2010
navap
Sure, if you have the context. And then what you're looking at is the relative URI.
2010-03-01 06009, 2010
MBChatLogger
brianfreud_ probably meant ' Hence my comment earlier that there seems no real reason that musicbrainz.org/uuid shouldn't be made to work, rather than requring the extra step of knowing the entity type, for musicbrainz.org/entity type/uuid '
2010-03-01 06009, 2010
brianfreud_
Hence my comment earlier that there seems no real reason that mb.org/uuid shouldn't be made to work, rather than requring the extra step of knowing the entity type, for mb.org/entity type/uuid
2010-03-01 06056, 2010
navap
What "could be" and what "should be" and even what "might be", are irrelevant to this converation.
2010-03-01 06017, 2010
brianfreud_
but in that sense, that's the difference between an MBID and an ArtistID, I guess - the MBID defines some unique entity at MB, though without explicitly defining the entity type. The ArtistID, LabelID, etc, all define a specific entity, with explicit entity type, at MB.
Currently the MBID page refers to MBIDs as the URIs that are assigned to the musical entities in the database.
2010-03-01 06031, 2010
brianfreud_
I guess I assumed it, but UUID -> MBID -> ArtistID/LabelID/TRMID/ReleaseID/RGID/etc && UUID -> MIPID -> PUID
2010-03-01 06033, 2010
navap
Anyway, I just edit stuff to say whatever it should say. If you think MBID is supposed to *only* mean the UUID, then take it up with Murdos as he seems to be the only one strongly opposed to that. Or at least he's the only one voicing their opinion.
2010-03-01 06010, 2010
brianfreud_
Well, it's only a name for something in the schema, but its definition seems kind of central to MB. Since there's decent reason to believe both, depending on when and where we look, perhaps which definition defines MBID is Rob should make a benevolent dictator decision on?
2010-03-01 06030, 2010
nikki
rob already said they're uuids :P
2010-03-01 06053, 2010
brianfreud_
sounds like a decision then :)
2010-03-01 06046, 2010
brianfreud_
Quick nit, something that keeps annoying me... Does the css for the wiki really need to define === as so huge? === is at least 3 times larger a fontsize than the orange bar text of ==
2010-03-01 06012, 2010
nikki doesn't know because she's using navap's ngs-style theme o/
2010-03-01 06017, 2010
navap
brianfreud_: huh? What browser are you using?
2010-03-01 06025, 2010
navap
nikki: :)
2010-03-01 06032, 2010
brianfreud_
FF 3.6.2
2010-03-01 06043, 2010
navap
It should look just fine.
2010-03-01 06004, 2010
navap
The sizes for h2s and h3s are quite similar. Nowhere near three times larger.
2010-03-01 06033, 2010
navap
In fact, they're the same size if I'm not mistaken.
2010-03-01 06036, 2010
brianfreud_
hmmm, ah - sorry; the ='s on this page were unbalenced; it was reading it as =
2010-03-01 06047, 2010
brianfreud_
do we have a BigMess category equiv?
2010-03-01 06035, 2010
navap
You can probably pick any category at random and you'll find it to bea a big mess :)
Instead of creating a new category to store stuff that needs fixing, I'd suggest creating a subpage of your user page and use it as a "todo" list.
2010-03-01 06028, 2010
navap
That ensures that the wiki itself doesn't get more corrupted in the attempt to fix it.
2010-03-01 06015, 2010
brianfreud_
only neg to that approach is that the lists themselves bit-rot; at least auto-generated backlinks clean up after themselves when the mess is fixed
2010-03-01 06053, 2010
navap
Actually *everything* bitrots, the only difference is where it's bitrotting. Having concent bitrot on your user page is much preferable to bitrotting out in the real wiki.
2010-03-01 06014, 2010
navap
That's just my opinion based on my travels around our wiki.
2010-03-01 06050, 2010
navap
The other advantage is that while you're going around finding pages that need work you're not constantly editing them all to add the category - and therefore creating lots of noise. You can make a few edits to your user page and add 20 pages at a time that way, and it's also easier to filter out user page edits.
2010-03-01 06035, 2010
brianfreud_
Sure, though theoretically minor edits like that should be marked as minor, which is also filterable :)
However, several in Discography RC aren't discographic ARs, and most AR in Online Data RC are not exclusively label-URL ARs.
2010-03-01 06000, 2010
navap
Which is why we had a discussion about renaming the discography class to "External resources"
2010-03-01 06020, 2010
navap
But since that's a major change it probably needs to go through the mailing list, and until someone does it it won't get renamed.
2010-03-01 06021, 2010
brianfreud_
that'd conflict with Online Database Relationship Class, wouldn't it?
2010-03-01 06032, 2010
navap
Not if the online database class is merged into it :)
2010-03-01 06049, 2010
brianfreud_
So one huge "External Resources Database Class"?
2010-03-01 06002, 2010
navap
Can you think of any reasons that might be a problem?
2010-03-01 06005, 2010
brianfreud_
sorry, "External Resources Relationship Class"
2010-03-01 06032, 2010
brianfreud_
not really. A class that huge seems kind of contrary to the point of classes though
2010-03-01 06006, 2010
navap
Perhaps, but having tons of small poorly defined classes which contradict each other also seems contrary to the point of classes :)
2010-03-01 06046, 2010
navap
Besides, I don't think a "class" does anything for the user using it.
2010-03-01 06002, 2010
brianfreud_
It'd be 19 ARs - that's the 2nd smallest, next to Production RC... But Production RC is then subClassed (or will be, after the RFC fixes it), so that one class really only has 2 ARs and 2 subClasses; This new Class would have 19 ARs and no internal organization
2010-03-01 06014, 2010
brianfreud_
2nd largest, I mean
2010-03-01 06033, 2010
navap
When it comes to url relationships, I don't think it makes sense to start overly categorizing them into small sections of the web. I like the idea of one big external resources class.
2010-03-01 06009, 2010
navap
If that means 19 relationships in one "class", then so be it.
2010-03-01 06023, 2010
navap
The number is only going to get bigger anyway.
2010-03-01 06003, 2010
nikki
we need to make as many of the url ones auto-detect anyway
2010-03-01 06006, 2010
nikki
+as possible
2010-03-01 06014, 2010
navap is attempting to rewrite the entity documentation pages but can't figure out if he wants to write them using the current schema or the NGS schema.
2010-03-01 06051, 2010
nikki
if you do it for ngs, it won't be out of date as fast :P
2010-03-01 06055, 2010
navap
I had current schema, then I switched to NGS, then back, now I'm thinking of going back to NGS.
navap: RFC to clean that mess up drafted and sent :)
2010-03-01 06051, 2010
brianfreud_
I went with one big class, divided into 3 subclasses of 10, 7, and 1 AR ("External Information", "External Website", and "Affiliate")
2010-03-01 06030, 2010
brianfreud_
re: entity pages, I know there's more difficult than the AR pages, but I'm trying to get them current, but with an eye towards making it as easy as possible to update them to NGS once it's in play (essentially, pass a quick RFC, then change "Track" to "Work", or whatever the old/new entity is, and the change will be done)
2010-03-01 06038, 2010
navap
I have a feeling my version of the entity pages would be quite different from yours :p
2010-03-01 06038, 2010
brianfreud_
lol, I'd prob take them to the list a few times
2010-03-01 06006, 2010
ruaok joined the channel
2010-03-01 06059, 2010
ruaok returns with new eyes
2010-03-01 06036, 2010
navap
Hey ruaok, so it went well?
2010-03-01 06043, 2010
ruaok
it did. :-)
2010-03-01 06048, 2010
ruaok
I'm quite jazzed.
2010-03-01 06004, 2010
ruaok
I'm trying to avoid computers though. thats why I've been sparse online this weekend.
2010-03-01 06021, 2010
brianfreud_
Good news :)
2010-03-01 06048, 2010
ruaok
:-)
2010-03-01 06001, 2010
brianfreud_
got a sec for me to ping you on your AR?
2010-03-01 06029, 2010
ruaok
in a minute. got two convos already.
2010-03-01 06032, 2010
brianfreud_
np
2010-03-01 06012, 2010
brianfreud_
Is noone here a Swedish-native/Swedish-fluent speaker?
2010-03-01 06035, 2010
brianfreud_
or Turkish-native/Turkish-fluent?
2010-03-01 06045, 2010
ruaok speaks blonde
2010-03-01 06044, 2010
warp
laser eyes ruaok \o/
2010-03-01 06048, 2010
ruaok
:-)
2010-03-01 06056, 2010
ruaok can't see shit atm.
2010-03-01 06007, 2010
ruaok
just put in more artificial tears
2010-03-01 06021, 2010
warp tags some music before work
2010-03-01 06033, 2010
ruaok
shouldn't you be during that during work?
2010-03-01 06042, 2010
ruaok
eating your own dogfood and all? ;)
2010-03-01 06022, 2010
warp
ruaok: I listen to stuff which often isn't in the DB, tagging a release can take a while
2010-03-01 06037, 2010
ruaok
ah. :-)
2010-03-01 06044, 2010
warp
it would be ok if it was just 'picard .' => cluster => lookup => save => quit, mv ~/tag/todo/foo /mnt/music/tagged/somewhere
2010-03-01 06023, 2010
warp
wasn't too bad this time. only had to add 1 disc (of a two disc release), and move two releases to the correct release group.
2010-03-01 06056, 2010
brianfreud_
ruaok: Just since I have to leave to work in a few min (I'll read scrollback), the 2 Qs for you on your AR:
2010-03-01 06043, 2010
brianfreud_
Q1: We'd talked in the dev mtg about "has press coverage" - did you prefer "has news coverage", as you used in the proposal page? The latter sounds more open-ended in terms of what could be linked to.
2010-03-01 06051, 2010
brianfreud_
Q2: Same lines, from Chad: "The original idea for Guardian in IRC talks about linking to tag/index pages on an artist, which might be sensible. The proposal as it reads, and the basic text of the relationship sounds like a free-for-all to link to individual articles, which I don't think would be a good idea. Which is it?"
2010-03-01 06047, 2010
ruaok
thx
2010-03-01 06051, 2010
ruaok will ponder
2010-03-01 06048, 2010
ijabz joined the channel
2010-03-01 06045, 2010
warp
aCiD2: ping? (i'm having trouble with git)
2010-03-01 06006, 2010
djce joined the channel
2010-03-01 06025, 2010
navap joined the channel
2010-03-01 06037, 2010
VectorX joined the channel
2010-03-01 06057, 2010
VectorX
hi just like artist alias, is there a track and album alias too ?
2010-03-01 06034, 2010
VectorX
also why are there like 4 or 5 asian aliases for english names, eg, Michael Learns to Rock ?
