#musicbrainz

http://nsfw-comix.com/nsfw312.htm (despite the url this is not nsfw heh )

Greetings from The Bicycling Guitarist (freenode truncates my name!)

hello lhuebner

check "The Bicycling Guitarist" YouTube channel to see what I'm about (or if you need some giggles)

hope to chat with some of you someday. peace out

this is old classical style, right? http://musicbrainz.org/release/1f87601a-cc22-4a...

if i understood the current style correctly I am to delete the ensemble and conductor from the title and add them as relationships in the release group?

Add them to the artist

"Mark Adderley; Ensemble Ernst, Thomas Rimul"

Or whatever

(both release and release group artist)

ok!

is there no default join phrase style?

Yes, what I used

Comma between each composer/performer, ; between both blocks

https://twitter.com/WarpRecords/status/56045300... how'd I enter this "release"? :)

A promo I guess?

yea, I think so

If it's release-ish, if not you could just do standalone recordings

But if it has track numbers and the like (which it seems to?) I guess a promo release

just checking the metadata now to see if they all have the same album metadata

lol, the twitter integration in this irc client blew my mind right now. http://puu.sh/f9dB7/71281f97de.png

I came across this song called "Goodnight_Sequence" and someone decided to write it as "Goodnight_sequence", which one is correct?

Leo_Verto: I think either is acceptable.

but one is the original song name

this *is* english capitalisation we're talking about :P hard to say something isn't correct there

(an argument could be made that it’s like two words so title case applies, or that it’s one word, so it doesn’t)

doesn't the english title guide recommend capitalizing most words?

yes

but there's nothing about whether an underscore makes something two words or not

we capitalise either side of a hyphen, so I would capitalise both, unless I had some reason not to

okay, am probably going to do that, but there's more arguable stuff

the songtitle on bandcap is "Mirai Sekai Pt. 4: Goodnight_Sequence", the full MB title is "Mirai Sekai, Part 4: Goodnight_sequence"

is abbrevation expansion to be applied to titles as well? and is that comma supposed to exist?

heh

currently yes and yes

although with the way https://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Reosarevok/Ab... is going, that might change at some point

the first one makes sense, but why is the comma required?

because some people like standardising things

also is "bgibbard voted for this at http://forums.musicbrainz.org/viewtopic.php?pid...; really a legit vote? :P

if you go up a couple of posts, they said they would vote but can't figure out how to log into the wiki

mhm, maybe I'm just too purist, but I kinda dislike that practice, second-party voting doesn't guarantee that everyone who expresses to vote on the forums is actually counted

not that it'd matter in this vote anyways :P

It feels like that guideline was probably meant for cases where the separator is implied already

decided against changing that song title and decided to ask the editor why he did it instead https://musicbrainz.org/edit/29744399

(like by a newline, or a supertitle with a list of parts)

If there's one thing I have learned about situations like this is that quiet changes tend to lead to passive aggressiveness while communication can solve it quite easily :D

Leo_Verto: given the vote is non-binding and I basically get to choose myself, it doesn't matter much :p (although obviously I'm not going to push my view if everyone else is against it - thankfully it seems it's the most popular one :) )

I don't care that much if you at least keep "feat." :P

Leo_Verto: cccould be the guesscase did it for them

Well, "feat." is unrelated to this, so yeah :)

(it's mandated by a separate guideline)

you guys *do* kow that a lot of track names with "feat." and a lot of artist credits deried from said tracknames *also* were originally "&" or "and"

before things like "some guy & some chick" was made to e trackname (feat. some chick")

even if original ahd &

had*

it does seem like MB Style is slowly chipping away at normalization/standardization

I don'd do that

Well, they can allways be fixed :)

picard should be able to make any joinphrase inot anything you'd want

reosarevok: abolutely

but my question still is. why can I use "and" but not "featuring"

heh

because "featuring" is longer

erh

Well, they're different things. A closer question would be I guess "why can I use 'and' or '&' but 'featuring' must be 'feat.'"

that's...

reosarevok: that's what i meant :P

they are both joinphrases afaik

"and" and "&" can have different meanings in some cases

versus means different things?