#musicbrainz

/

      • kuno
        hawke1: it seems much less of an explosion than with physical releases.
      • hawke1
        kuno: Is it?
      • CallerNo6
        oops, "the same on one level"
      • hibiscuskazeneko joined the channel
      • kuno
        hawke1: with physical releases you have all these different regions and such, whereas in most cases if you download a release from iTunes the files will be exactly the same regardless of whether you purchased that release in the US, DE, FR, whatever iTunes region.
      • CallerNo6
        so kuno, if a label assings a catno to the digital edition and a vendor then makes that edition available in different encodings, what happens to the catno? is it still valid?
      • grr, typos
      • hawke1
        kuno: we might be talking about different things then...
      • kuno
        CallerNo6: different encodings to me means the audio is actually different. So, for me that is similar as giving the same catno to the CD and SACD release or something like that.
      • hawke1
        kuno: does that apply with different lossless formats?
      • kuno
        hawke1: not unless the files are different in some other meaningful way
      • hawke1
        anyway, bandcamp alone has MP3, FLAC, ALAC (Apple Lossless), AAC, Ogg Vorbis, WAV and AIFF -- that's a multiplier of 7 on every release they have.
      • that seems like a huge explosion of effort
      • darwin
        (sigh, ftr, I agree with hawke every time this comes up)
      • (no, there is no reason for every encoding to be considered a different recording)
      • kuno
        hawke1: I'm OK with treating all those as equivalent, because if you purchase one of them you get access to all of them and can pick which of them you'd like to download. So your purchase includes all of them (and it seems silly to add all of them as separate discs to the release).
      • hawke1: on bleep though better quality files are more expensive, so on bleep they seem like separate releases.
      • aron_kexp joined the channel
      • hibiscuskazeneko has quit
      • hawke1: I can see some value in being more practical than I personally think we should be, so I wouldn't oppose a guideline for MB to consider certain things equivalent which I personally think should be kept separate.
      • CallerNo6
        kuno, would it serve the same purpose to have field for "available in the following encodings" or something?
      • kuno
        CallerNo6: for digital releases I think it makes sense to model them a bit differently as physical releases
      • CallerNo6: it's not just about encodings though, for the same release the .mp3s you buy from boomkat are not bitwise equivalent to those bought from bleep.
      • hawke1
        kuno: the other half is inexpert people trying to determine which release they have, plus youtube rips, plus god knows what else
      • kuno
        CallerNo6: if as a music purchaser for some reason I prefer those from bleep (maybe because boomkat tags in such a way that it crashes my android phone or some nonsense like that), it would be useful to know who actually did the encoding, not just what the encoding is.
      • ofcourse distinguishing between MP3 retailers which do their own encoding and those which re-sell encodings made by 7digital or someone else is probably just as arcane as caring about attaching the correct label to a release ;)
      • reosarevok
        Of course you should be substituting those tags with MB ones anyway :D
      • CallerNo6
        the one true tags
      • kuno
        reosarevok: there is atleast one release on bleep where the MP3 version has per-track cover art, that's not something picard can do.
      • reosarevok
        yet. I hope
      • But yeah
      • aron_kexp has quit
      • aron_kexp joined the channel
      • CallerNo6
        it might seem like I'm wasting time repeating arguments about labels when I should be thinking about areas.
      • actually,I think it's a similar problem. so I'm doing both.
      • drsaunde
        yes areas please
      • CallerNo6
        hi!
      • to paraphrase... position one: "that's not a real word because it's not in the dictionary!"
      • position two: "of course it's a word. I said it, my listeners understood it. that's all that matters."
      • position three: "I edit dictionaries, and I'd love to include everything but I can't."
      • hawke1 has quit
      • hawke1 joined the channel
      • hawke1
        CallerNo6: why should you be thinking about areas? :-)
      • CallerNo6
        because when there was a call for a volunteer, everybody else took one step backwards
      • hawke1
        a volunteer to think about areas?
      • CallerNo6
        yes. I am the area thinker-abouter.
      • hawke1
        nice. :-D
      • So what do you think about areas?
      • CallerNo6
        nice places to visit. wouldn't wan to live there!
      • hawke1
        Good one!
      • So what is it about areas that needs thought? How to deal with the historical area mess?
      • Greg__ joined the channel
      • CallerNo6
        a few things.
      • Greg__ has left the channel
      • hawke1
        like such as? The Iraq?
      • CallerNo6
        1. should editing be opened up to more/all editors?
      • 2. should mb-areas be more descriptive or more prescriptive?
      • 3. Is there a way to return to a bot-centric system?
      • 4. how can we make everybody happy?
      • hawke1
        1. maybe. 2. what? 3. yes. 4. you can't.
      • CallerNo6
        5. how can we avoid having a dataset that's out of sync with other external resources?
      • 4.but, but, but
      • hawke1
        3 relates to the sort of mess around the wikidata bot, right?
      • CallerNo6
        yeah
      • drsaunde
        one thing i'll say...we should only care about areas that we need for artists in our database...we don't need to be complete with all the towns in the world...just the ones we need
      • CallerNo6
        an example of 2 would be districts and neighborhoods. how granular should we be? and what if there's no real-world consensus on boundaries for things like neighborhoods?
      • drsaunde
        if a neighbourhood is significant enough that an artist would say he is from there...that should be enough
      • CallerNo6
        drsaunde: I agree that we don't need Pangaea.
      • hawke1
        we totally do.
      • drsaunde
        so...my faceless neighbourhood..no...but Harlem? Hollywood?
      • hawke1
        CallerNo6: IMO the way to do it would be to have the bot continue to import ~country or ~state level entities completely (because we'll need all of those for sure.
      • CallerNo6
        6. is the box-in-a-box model of areas viable?
      • drsaunde
        bot hasn't imported anything in years
      • hawke1
        drsaunde: OK, import/sync then.
      • drsaunde
        CallerNo6: also you are wrong to say nobody volunteered to take over areas
      • CallerNo6
        s/continue/resume/ ?
      • hawke1
        Anyway -- and then allow people to import other entities by pasting a wikipedia page -> pull in the wikidata entry -> add it to the list of stuff to be synced.
      • CallerNo6: yeah. Whatever the situation is. :-)
      • CallerNo6
        drsaunde: sorry, I was only referring to a specific conversation.
      • hawke1
        CallerNo6: that's my opinion on the extent of 1, 3, and 5.
      • I don't really get #2 -- how would we be either descriptive or prescriptive, on areas?
      • reosarevok
        Well, I guess that kinda applies to stuff like the neighbourhoods. Also to stuff like Crimea
      • CallerNo6
        hawke1: "descriptive" would be "if an artist says she's from <foo>, then <foo> is a place"
      • "prescriptive" would be "if a reputable external source (like e.g. geonames) says <foo> is an area, then it is"
      • an editor might ask "well, crap, if she says she's from <foo>, I want to record that /somewhere/. I should be able to."
      • another editor might say "what good is our area data if it's not linked 1:1 with an external source?"
      • hawke1
        Got it.
      • Then I would 100% say "descriptive but with reference to a suitably liberal external source such as wikidata"
      • CallerNo6
        I thought you might :-)
      • drsaunde
        i would agree
      • w/hawk
      • e1
      • CallerNo6
        the box-in-a-box problem is the one that really gets me down.
      • hawke1
        Is that one, "is every area we might want to use contained within some other area"?
      • CallerNo6
        yeah, one and only one
      • reosarevok
        To which the answer is already no, though, with multy-county American cities
      • The_Freso joined the channel
      • So I guess the right question is "wtf do we do with those"
      • darwin
      • hawke1
        reosarevok: Put them at the lowest level of the tree we can?
      • I mean, I assume that's why we care at all?
      • I'm not totally sure why we care about that.
      • CallerNo6
        we're stuck with that because the server uses the "is in" relationships when it decides how to display areas.
      • ruaok has quit
      • (stuck with box-in-a-box, that is)
      • hawke1
        and it doesn't allow something to be within multiple things, or what?
      • CallerNo6
        correct
      • reosarevok
        That doesn't mean it can't be changed, of course
      • drsaunde
        exactly...change it
      • hawke1
        That's stupid. :-)
      • kepstin-laptop has quit
      • reosarevok
        I guess it could be taught to display stuff by skipping steps where it finds more than one, for now
      • CallerNo6
        yeah, I need somebody to explain the server code better.
      • Freso has quit
      • The_Freso is now known as Freso
      • reosarevok
        (which would allow keeping the "illusion" of box-in-a-box)
      • So, "if City X is in County A and County B, just say City X, State"
      • CallerNo6
        +1
      • reosarevok
        Only issue is for cases where the top level is the tricky one. But dunno how common those are
      • Probably not very
      • CallerNo6
        example?
      • reosarevok
        Stuff in Crimea/Kosovo seems like an obvious case
      • darwin
        LOL
      • I hate to paste this, but.
      • you'll thank me later?
      • reosarevok
        :D
      • CallerNo6
        I think I've read the "names" version of that
      • reosarevok
        darwin: well we know there are exceptions, we want to find how to reach a display that can work for the general cases, ideally without breaking horribly on exceptions :p
      • darwin
        most specifically refer to "addresses" not so much regions, but some ("multiple towns with the same name in the same country") do apply
      • reosarevok
        I mean, we don't need them to be unique
      • The_Freso joined the channel
      • Areas *do* have disambiguation comments
      • So if we have a few cases where the search would display the same, it's always possible to add a disambiguation
      • But I really need to sleep now so I'll let you all discuss this :)
      • hawke1
      • reosarevok
        CallerNo6: if I remember correctly, we have a database view that does area containment and that's what we use for display. You might want to search for the sql for that view as a start
      • Freso has quit
      • The_Freso is now known as Freso
      • (well, that's the basis of what we use, anyway :p)
      • Night for now! :)
      • reosarevok has quit
      • hawke1
      • (substitute q=30 for q=the wikidata ID of whatever country you want
      • aron_kexp has quit
      • CallerNo6 has quit
      • The_Freso joined the channel
      • CallerNo6 joined the channel
      • Freso has quit
      • The_Freso is now known as Freso