#musicbrainz

I want to see info about charts and awards on MB :)

heh

I have no idea how we could store that

(apart from in the annotation)

IMDb can :)

derr84: Put it in the annotation for now.

derr84: That way the data will be there if we ever actually get to add it properly.

hn

isn't it wrong t oadd those?

To add what?

I'm sorry but i keep thinkign that to add a relationship like "x played guitar, trumpet and trekbasoon on y" is wrong when x is [unknown]

Oh

Well, there's no guideline in either direction so I guess everyone can just vote what they think

But it is still the only way we have to indicate that *someone* played guitar

he doesn't make it easier wne he's patronizing me to the elevent degree by saying i should read "an introduction to voting"

Well, admittedly that page does say " If you're voting No, please always leave an edit note explaining why"

(which I assume is what you didn't do?)

i don't know.. i'd think "i disagree" is tha same is "no" as a vote

peopel are so damn sore about everything

i remember 6 years ago, nobody *DEMANDED* you to explain your no vote, or your yes vote for that matter

your vote was your voice

it's pretty much expected that you'll explain a no vote now, though.

It's not the point. People know you disagree. But as the page continues, "this allows the editor to explain his reasons or, if the edit is just wrong, gives him/her pointers on what to do instead"

hmm

yea yea

Basically, the point is that if you don't say why you think it's wrong, people will keep being wrong

but usually peopel then point out that my oppinion can go fuck itself and either i cange my vote to abstai nor i change my vote to yes

I'll explain

on what page does it say this isn't decided either way reo?

Well, it doesn't say it. Because it's not decided :p

There's nothing written about it at all, I think

ok

(some conversations about it on the chatlogs, at most)

well i canged my vote to abstai nbecasuse my oppinion is always questioned.. this is why i usually don't actually leaver a message, becasue it always leads to an argument i can't defend or fights i can't win. my oppinion is recirded, i chnage my vote becasue i can't say anything, but atleast it's ther for posterity

Well, you don't *have* to change your vote if you are not convinced by their arguments

people don't really go crazy gonuts if I get a no vote without explanation

yes i do becasue they keep spammign me and gettign angry

always

"you have no point" this is right yo uare wrong etc etc"

If you were voting against a guideline, then yeah

But this is not the case, so...

http://musicbrainz.org/artist/72de4cdd-112f-44b... :D

All recordings CSG-fied! :D

:O

(which means that list is empty except for the three the composer performed too, and one that's being merged)

so what ae we doing, recordign go to whomever recorded them, work to the composer, and tracklist whatever rthe fucks on the liner?

that's the idea i had once too a few weeks ago whiel on the can

Tracklist to composer, usually, but yeah

not that i've followed along with csg discussion at all mind you

well composer's usually what's on the liner so :)

(it's all in http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Classical )

All we have for now, at least

do yo uahve a tl;dr version?

Oh, it says composer specifically

"The Track Artist field should contain just the composer; not the performer(s). Use special artist [unknown] if you cannot find out who the composer is"

erh i think you mean anon

"The Recording Artist field should contain the most important performers who appear on that specific recording, but it is acceptable that newly-created recordings have their artist information derived from a tracklist. Use a comma between multiple artists"

if you don't knoew the composer it's [anonymous]

No, no. You use [anon] if it's anon, you use [unknown] if you can't find the info (because the release sucks, for example)

oh liek that

but wher eare you readign all this

In the pages linked from http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Classical

http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Classical doesn't actually say anything

sorry it's greek to me :/

wher is the classical style guide now?

There

It's just divided in sections

link?

Click the different links for each thing in http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Classical :p

It's all there! :)

All that has passed style for now

i'm beign stupid. please help?

CatCat: you see the links that say "Release and Release Group Title", etc.?

click those.

i don't understand

why do those need a full page by themselves?

atleast make a short general thing under the header

Because the old CSG was tl;dr

As you said

aha! os it's a left over

No, no

The old CSG was tl;dr *because* it was (almost) all in one page

once i ma very much less tired than today i could read al lthis and make a short summary of each topic

I guess a short summary could be put there, though

yes

It's just that it's so partial right now that it might feel weird

(for example, there's nothing at all for works)

hm. didn't we use to have relationships for live sound or is my brain making things up again?

no live sound recording/mixing/engineering, no front of house, nothing :/

Shepard: we did

It was merged

(RFC a long time ago IIRC)

aha! so I'm not imagining things :D

do you remember what it was called and what it was merged into?

"live sound engineering" and into "sound engineering" IIRC

Shepard: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-3672

thanks!

it might make sense to add a 'live' attribute to some of the engineering ars, imo.

It might also make sense to go to bed early for once.

G'night!

Night

ba-bye)

so many 502s...

yeah

.

clack, bang?

Oh, already a bang there