does that supercede the french capitalization standards we've set?
2007-05-05 12502, 2007
warp
Jugdish: if used consistently, across all official mentions of a track, ArtistIntent trumps anything else.
2007-05-05 12556, 2007
Jugdish
i don't agree with that. an artist may consistently use a capitalization standard that just isn't as strict as ours, that doesn't mean they fervently believe it should be capitalized their way and only their way
2007-05-05 12527, 2007
Jugdish
unless it's SoMeThInG WeIrD LiKe ThIs and they always capitalize it that way...but if we're talking "La Dispute" (mb standard) vs. "La dispute" (artist page), i think we should go with our standard
2007-05-05 12550, 2007
warp
if the artist consistently uses 'La dispute', it is certainly intentional. So, for me that will be the name of the track, MB shouldn't start calling it something else.
2007-05-05 12556, 2007
mudcrow
you have to prove artist intent, is it capitalised the same way on the release as on the website? does every release of this track have the same capitalisation?
2007-05-05 12518, 2007
warp nods.
2007-05-05 12548, 2007
mudcrow
I usually email the artist and ask them, I've never had an artist say that any capitalisation was intentional that i've asked
<warp> if the artist consistently uses 'La dispute', it is certainly intentional. <- that's not the artist intent principle btw but the ConsistentOriginalData principle, see http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/StylePrinciple
2007-05-05 12539, 2007
warp
that only says to use the most common version of several different versions of capitalization or spelling have been found on releases, etc..
2007-05-05 12528, 2007
warp
(and no proof as to which one is the one the artist intended, if anything)
yep, see even labels can't list their own releases correctly
2007-05-05 12519, 2007
warp
hehe :)
2007-05-05 12547, 2007
Shepard
warp: no, it doesn't
2007-05-05 12507, 2007
Jugdish
they're in the music business, they're no anal retentive like us :P
2007-05-05 12518, 2007
warp
Shepard: "This is for ambiguous tracks titles. Where there are multiple track titles (with different spelling, capitalisation or punctuation) for the same song." at http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ConsistentOriginalData
I think the stuff on ConsistentOriginalData should actually go on a page like MakeDataConsistent or something. perhaps that could be another style principle, so far it is just common agreement though
2007-05-05 12556, 2007
warp
Shepard: hm. ok.
2007-05-05 12512, 2007
warp
Shepard: not sure what you mean...
2007-05-05 12512, 2007
Shepard
ConsistentOriginalData is a bit confusing as it's very near to ArtistIntent
2007-05-05 12553, 2007
warp
yes, even without it, i would claim to infer ArtistIntent from his/her consistent usage (as i did just now ;)
2007-05-05 12506, 2007
warp
meh, headache.. i'll be afk for a while.
2007-05-05 12524, 2007
timo- has quit
2007-05-05 12524, 2007
FauxFaux has quit
2007-05-05 12552, 2007
timo- joined the channel
2007-05-05 12552, 2007
FauxFaux joined the channel
2007-05-05 12529, 2007
drsaunde
clowns are neato..clowns are fun...clowns are loved by everyone!
2007-05-05 12515, 2007
Shepard
they taste funny
2007-05-05 12556, 2007
drsaunde was singing a very funny song from http://musicbrainz.org/release/a68d57d9-d55d-4473-a2e5-01c3f4894da9.html
2007-05-05 12526, 2007
Shepard spots caps to correct
2007-05-05 12516, 2007
Jugdish
how do you indicate the end date of a solo artist's musical career?
2007-05-05 12558, 2007
Shepard
the end date is when they die
2007-05-05 12524, 2007
Jugdish
not always
2007-05-05 12537, 2007
Jugdish
they can stop making music before they die
2007-05-05 12541, 2007
Shepard
for MB
2007-05-05 12555, 2007
Shepard
that is: that's what the field is used for
2007-05-05 12556, 2007
srotta
They never stop!
2007-05-05 12531, 2007
Jugdish
well there should be a way to indicate the years a person was musically active in addition to their birth/death dates
2007-05-05 12501, 2007
Jugdish
or maybe that would just be opening a can of worms...
2007-05-05 12511, 2007
drsaunde
i disagree...."musically active" is way too subjective to quantify
2007-05-05 12540, 2007
Shepard
I don't think any musician picks up an instrument at some point and starts selling records and then puts it away again at some certain point
2007-05-05 12555, 2007
Shepard
if you have some rough information, put it in the annotation
2007-05-05 12550, 2007
mudcrow hates clowns.
2007-05-05 12551, 2007
Jugdish
drsaunde: you could make the same argument about bands too. just because they breakup now doesn't mean they wouldn't re-unite at some future date (i.e. Smashing Pumpkins)
2007-05-05 12554, 2007
Shepard
except for casted pop acts maybe ;)
2007-05-05 12519, 2007
drsaunde
jug: I agree with you on that
2007-05-05 12543, 2007
drsaunde
almost every act with some good sales and living members will re-form at some point
2007-05-05 12508, 2007
srotta
Yeah, that's why we have problems with those.
2007-05-05 12513, 2007
Jugdish
incidentally, how would you handle a case such as the Smashing Pumpkins? should their end date be changed from "2000" to "?" now that they've made another record and are touring again?
2007-05-05 12522, 2007
drsaunde
does mudcrow hate the vandals as well?
2007-05-05 12524, 2007
srotta
IMO, yes.
2007-05-05 12528, 2007
mudcrow
the start & ends dates for bands needs more fields. I know lots of bands that have reformed after 20 odd years, with just a start & end date it looks like they were always active rather than active for a few months
2007-05-05 12545, 2007
mudcrow
the vandals are fun
2007-05-05 12516, 2007
drsaunde
:-)
2007-05-05 12532, 2007
timo- has quit
2007-05-05 12532, 2007
FauxFaux has quit
2007-05-05 12559, 2007
timo- joined the channel
2007-05-05 12559, 2007
FauxFaux joined the channel
2007-05-05 12531, 2007
mudcrow
so annoying that discogs has drastically reduced the submssion/edit levels. I can't fix sod all now
2007-05-05 12548, 2007
Shepard
with Genesis for example there are no definitive dates breakup & re-unite dates but they've definitely been inactive for some time
2007-05-05 12553, 2007
Shepard
-dates
2007-05-05 12535, 2007
enjayhch has quit
2007-05-05 12503, 2007
mudcrow
Rudimentary Peni have been going since around 1980, never gig and release on average one release every 5 years. very inactive most of the time, but have never disbanded
does anybody know the details of how catalog #'s work?
2007-05-05 12527, 2007
Jugdish
should catalog #'s always increase in chronological order?
2007-05-05 12527, 2007
Shepard
every label has its own cat# system
2007-05-05 12537, 2007
Jugdish
ok
2007-05-05 12511, 2007
Jugdish
so cat #'s aren't necessarily assigned to records in the order that they get released?
2007-05-05 12543, 2007
srotta
Nope.
2007-05-05 12546, 2007
Shepard
most of the time they are I'd say. but who knows? :)
2007-05-05 12515, 2007
srotta
I have a couple of examples of Cat#'s that are basically an increasing serial number.
2007-05-05 12525, 2007
srotta
Except that there are a couple of compilations that are out of order.
2007-05-05 12531, 2007
drsaunde
the difference in dates between when a label assigns a catalog # to a release and when it gets released can be quite large
2007-05-05 12520, 2007
srotta
Of course, and that's probably the reason for those out-of-order situation in my case.
2007-05-05 12511, 2007
drsaunde
yeah...would make sense that the delay for compilations would be longer, probably due to the extra time to get everything approved
2007-05-05 12518, 2007
drsaunde
licensing wise
2007-05-05 12530, 2007
drsaunde has been awake for 6 hours too long and must sleep
2007-05-05 12532, 2007
drsaunde has quit
2007-05-05 12540, 2007
Muz has quit
2007-05-05 12529, 2007
muz joined the channel
2007-05-05 12536, 2007
Shepard` joined the channel
2007-05-05 12548, 2007
Shepard has quit
2007-05-05 12550, 2007
Shepard`
Shepard` is now known as Shepard
2007-05-05 12515, 2007
Amblin- has quit
2007-05-05 12540, 2007
Synchro joined the channel
2007-05-05 12549, 2007
cooperaa joined the channel
2007-05-05 12520, 2007
Jugdish
<drsaunde> the difference in dates between when a label assigns a catalog # to a release and when it gets released can be quite large <-- does this also mean that it's possible for some catalog #'s to be skipped over (like if it was assigned to a record that ended up never being released)?
2007-05-05 12538, 2007
cooperaa
Jugdish: sounds plausible
2007-05-05 12518, 2007
Jugdish
ok, then i can stop my hunt for some elusive missing cat #'s when trying to complete a label's catalog :P
