kepstin-work: have a "meatbag" entity that lives above the artists
2012-08-15 22837, 2012
hawke_1
kepstin-work: Yeah, but there’s a person behind it as opposed to a group
2012-08-15 22853, 2012
culinko2 joined the channel
2012-08-15 22801, 2012
hawke_1
Marilyn Manson is much worse in that regard
2012-08-15 22801, 2012
kepstin-work
a group is just a brand with multiple persons behind it; not that much different :)
2012-08-15 22848, 2012
CallerNo6
presumably we know these are "brands", not "people" because of the performance name AR.
2012-08-15 22802, 2012
Rondom_ joined the channel
2012-08-15 22804, 2012
hawke_1
composition ARs tend to be uglier though
2012-08-15 22812, 2012
hawke_1
and production
2012-08-15 22826, 2012
hawke_1
(when you have a person with the same name as a group)
2012-08-15 22844, 2012
kepstin-work
CallerNo6: yeah, that's the only way right now. They don't get separate artist types; both Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta and Lady Gaga are "Person"
2012-08-15 22827, 2012
hawke_1
What an unwieldy name.
2012-08-15 22831, 2012
reosarevok
They are two levels, maaake them sooo
2012-08-15 22840, 2012
reosarevok insists too much :p
2012-08-15 22846, 2012
reosarevok
But it still feels simpler to me
2012-08-15 22807, 2012
kepstin-work would almost rather merge artists and labels together than split them up more
2012-08-15 22816, 2012
hawke_1
reosarevok: Doesn’t that mean duplicating every single person artist in the db?
2012-08-15 22826, 2012
hawke_1
kepstin-work: Yes please.
2012-08-15 22841, 2012
Jormangeud^ joined the channel
2012-08-15 22843, 2012
kepstin-work
make them all subtypes of a single 'Actor' type that can be linked in ARs rdf-style ;)
2012-08-15 22846, 2012
reosarevok
hawke_1: no, it means uniquely identifying each person in the DB :p
2012-08-15 22812, 2012
hawke_1
?
2012-08-15 22829, 2012
reosarevok
(as opposed to the current mess where one person can have 5 MBIDs for 4 "brands" and a name)
2012-08-15 22840, 2012
drsaunde
kepstin-work: I would call Sam Roberts Band a true band and not a Roberts alias, they were a band before Roberts too called "Blinker the Star"
2012-08-15 22802, 2012
kepstin-work
drsaunde: i don't disagree; Sam Roberts Band is definitely a band.
2012-08-15 22804, 2012
hawke_1
reosarevok: How is that a mess, though?
2012-08-15 22807, 2012
CallerNo6
so reo wants an Artist Group?
2012-08-15 22828, 2012
kepstin-work
drsaunde: the issue is deciding whether some of the older stuff released under "Sam Roberts" is actually the work of the band, or just the guy :)
2012-08-15 22836, 2012
hawke_1
I do disagree with that 5th MBID for the name, I guess.
2012-08-15 22838, 2012
reosarevok
hawke_1: well, to begin with, there's no MBID that identifies a person (no 1:1 map to the IPI or ISNI concept)
2012-08-15 22840, 2012
drsaunde
ahh
2012-08-15 22853, 2012
hawke_1
But that also means that any person who performs something would need an additional entity for the person
2012-08-15 22813, 2012
Digw33d joined the channel
2012-08-15 22823, 2012
culinko2
imho, for artists, it should be all merged into one entity. for groups, don't know.
2012-08-15 22833, 2012
leonardo_ joined the channel
2012-08-15 22816, 2012
dimonov_ joined the channel
2012-08-15 22825, 2012
reosarevok
hawke_1: indeed
2012-08-15 22851, 2012
reosarevok
hawke_1: every release has a release group, too :p
2012-08-15 22804, 2012
reosarevok doesn't think that's a problem
2012-08-15 22827, 2012
HazRPG joined the channel
2012-08-15 22828, 2012
CallerNo6
reosarevok: so every person is a work, and every artist a performance?
2012-08-15 22832, 2012
reosarevok
heh
2012-08-15 22844, 2012
reosarevok
Well, that's more or less kepstin-work's concept of it, yes
2012-08-15 22825, 2012
kepstin-work
well, not really, most single-person artists present themselves as themselves and don't really need the extra layer
2012-08-15 22825, 2012
reosarevok
"Neil Young" is certainly a brand :p
2012-08-15 22853, 2012
reosarevok
Even if the guy's called like that
2012-08-15 22814, 2012
reosarevok
But really, it's more like every person is a work, and every artist an arrangement
2012-08-15 22825, 2012
reosarevok
Sometimes you need them, other times you don't
2012-08-15 22844, 2012
reosarevok
The problem is that we have the level we don't always need instead of the one we do
2012-08-15 22832, 2012
CallerNo6
"Everyone wants to be Cary Grant�even I want to be Cary Grant," -- Cary Grant
2012-08-15 22812, 2012
gnu_andrew joined the channel
2012-08-15 22826, 2012
CallerNo6
Is this a question of "I want a well-formed object model that fits my conception of an 'artist'"? Or is it "I want these things to be displayed on the same MB page"?
2012-08-15 22853, 2012
kepstin-work
where it gets really fun is when you have a band full of performers who cultivate appearances different from their personal selves...
2012-08-15 22827, 2012
reosarevok
CallerNo6: to me, it's mostly "I want a clear unique identifier for a person"
2012-08-15 22859, 2012
CallerNo6
reosarevok: why? For presentation or for semantic meaning?
2012-08-15 22808, 2012
reosarevok
The latter
2012-08-15 22803, 2012
CallerNo6 concurs
2012-08-15 22855, 2012
CallerNo6
That's a bigger question than "where is the line between AC and new artist?"
2012-08-15 22814, 2012
kepstin-work
hmm. so that would mean adding a new (optional) 'person' type; moving all IPIs there, and linking them to any 'artists' that they happen to be?
2012-08-15 22853, 2012
reosarevok
Yeah, and also ending the discussion "should we add artists for legal names or not"
2012-08-15 22806, 2012
reosarevok
(with "no, we should add a person instead")
2012-08-15 22808, 2012
kepstin-work
in the really simple cases, they wouldn't be needed at all.
2012-08-15 22839, 2012
CallerNo6
when is a project a performance name and when is it a band with one member? :-)
2012-08-15 22843, 2012
kepstin-work
in a lot of cases, we will never associate a person to an artist.
2012-08-15 22809, 2012
kepstin-work
CallerNo6: with having a separate person type, that wouldn't matter - either way it's an "artist"
HSOWA: Then you get into the question of “Did Declan Patrick MacManus write this, or did Elvis Costello write this?” — and the answer to both is “yes” IMO.
2012-08-15 22841, 2012
hawke_1
(write, arrange, whatever AR)
2012-08-15 22842, 2012
reosarevok
The person entity wrote it! :D
2012-08-15 22848, 2012
hawke_1
exactly.
2012-08-15 22802, 2012
hawke_1
CallerNo6: I don’t find it much more useful, no.
2012-08-15 22817, 2012
reosarevok
"Person" did x on "X" as "Artist" :p
2012-08-15 22809, 2012
CallerNo6
hawke_1: same question, then. Are you objecting on semantic grounds? Or presentational grounds?
2012-08-15 22813, 2012
hawke_1
CallerNo6: I’m not sure what you mean. Both, maybe? On semantic grounds it’s stupid to have them separate because the distinction is meaningless (for ARs). On presentational
2012-08-15 22825, 2012
hawke_1
…grounds it might sometimes make sense.
2012-08-15 22838, 2012
reosarevok
The distinction is far from meaningless, one is a person, other is a persona
2012-08-15 22825, 2012
hawke_1
reosarevok: The distinction of “Richard Davis James performed kazoo” vs. “Aphex Twin performed kazoo” is meaningless to me.
2012-08-15 22837, 2012
hawke_1
(likewise for all ARs I can think of offhand)
2012-08-15 22852, 2012
hawke_1
“Walter Carlos composed Timesteps”=“Wendy Carlos composed Timesteps”.
2012-08-15 22808, 2012
CallerNo6
But the only difference is "I want to represent this as an object" vs "I want to represent this with relationships", isn't it?
2012-08-15 22846, 2012
CallerNo6
Either way, at the presentational level I'd rather see them all on one page, or somehow grouped together.
2012-08-15 22841, 2012
reosarevok
There's also the annoying thing of artists needing a name
2012-08-15 22802, 2012
reosarevok
Right now you can't relate two personas of the same guy unless you a) know his legal name or b) do it wrong
2012-08-15 22806, 2012
CallerNo6
He should have a EAN
2012-08-15 22843, 2012
reosarevok
aka "person MBID" :p
2012-08-15 22808, 2012
hawke_1
reosarevok: “do it wrong”?
2012-08-15 22825, 2012
kepstin-work
so should our hypothetical person entities support not having names?
