Difference between revisions of "History:Artist History"

From MusicBrainz Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
((Imported from MoinMoin))
 
(FWIW, moving some bitroted discussion out of Terminology pages (Imported from MoinMoin))
Line 3: Line 3:
 
** [[History Of Featuring Artist Style|HistoryOfFeaturingArtistStyle]]
 
** [[History Of Featuring Artist Style|HistoryOfFeaturingArtistStyle]]
 
** [[Getting Rid Of Featuring Artist Style|GettingRidOfFeaturingArtistStyle]]
 
** [[Getting Rid Of Featuring Artist Style|GettingRidOfFeaturingArtistStyle]]
  +
  +
==PublisherRelationshipType==
  +
  +
Before the introduction of the label system, some artists were created for publishers. They were indeed companies, and ought to be migrated to Labels. It was even suggested the following:
  +
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">The introduction of [[Publisher Relationship Type|PublisherRelationshipType]] implies the existence of a new artist type, which should probably called "Company". This could be handled by the existing "Group" artist type, but I'd suggest that a new type be created. Other types might be created in future, such as "Label". It's also worth considering formalizing the difference between [[Legal Name|LegalName]] and [[Performance Name|PerformanceName]] this way: which is discussed further on [[Musical Association Relationship Class|MusicalAssociationRelationshipClass]], [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2005-June/000136.html here], and [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2005-June/000138.html here].
  +
</ul>
   
 
[[Stub]]
 
[[Stub]]

Revision as of 14:32, 16 May 2007

History:

PublisherRelationshipType

Before the introduction of the label system, some artists were created for publishers. They were indeed companies, and ought to be migrated to Labels. It was even suggested the following:

  • The introduction of PublisherRelationshipType implies the existence of a new artist type, which should probably called "Company". This could be handled by the existing "Group" artist type, but I'd suggest that a new type be created. Other types might be created in future, such as "Label". It's also worth considering formalizing the difference between LegalName and PerformanceName this way: which is discussed further on MusicalAssociationRelationshipClass, here, and here.

Stub