Difference between revisions of "History talk:Performance Restructuring Proposal"

From MusicBrainz Wiki
m (New page: See PerformanceRestructuringProposal for ideas on how to restructure performance link types and attributes.<br/> Please go to [[Talk:Instrument Addit...)
 
m (cleanup)
Line 1: Line 1:
See [[Performance Restructuring Proposal|PerformanceRestructuringProposal]] for ideas on how to restructure performance link types and attributes.<br/> Please go to [[Talk:Instrument Addition|InstrumentAdditionDiscussion]] to discuss the addition of instruments.  
+
See [[Performance Restructuring Proposal|PerformanceRestructuringProposal]] for ideas on how to restructure performance link types and attributes.<br/> Please go to [[Talk:Advanced Instrument Tree]] to discuss the addition of instruments.  
  
 
===Use of Date in PerformerRelationshipType===
 
===Use of Date in PerformerRelationshipType===

Revision as of 15:33, 27 February 2010

See PerformanceRestructuringProposal for ideas on how to restructure performance link types and attributes.
Please go to Talk:Advanced Instrument Tree to discuss the addition of instruments.

Use of Date in PerformerRelationshipType

There is presently no guideline on what the date attribute means for this Relationship Type. I think we should get some consensus on guidance, and add it. This is an issue for example in Edit #8012093. There is a similar issue with PerformanceRelationshipClass and CompositionRelationshipClass generally; see ComposerRelationshipType discussion. -- JimDeLaHunt 2007-12-17

  • My own view is that the date attributes should be filled in to indicate when the performance activity, happened -- when we have the data. Usually it will be the date of the recording session or concert. Date of performance is nice to record when we know it, but a performer AR with no date should also be acceptable as a first step. -- JimDeLaHunt 2007-12-17
  • It may be that only the year is known from a date (e.g. 1876), so I think that either Year, or Year-Month, or Year-Month-Date should be acceptable values for the date attributes. -- JimDeLaHunt 2007-12-17

PerformerRelationshipType at Track and Release level

Music is at a Track level, so the performer AR is also fundamentally a track-level attribute. However, ArtistRoleInheritance talks about how ARs could be applied at the Track, Release, or higher levels. It also proposes, "All information should be recorded at the highest possible level." Applying this principle, Performer relationships should be put at the Track level, unless all Tracks in a given release would have the same Performer AR, in which case it's OK to put that AR at the Release level. There is a similar issue with PerformanceRelationshipClass and CompositionRelationshipClass generally; see ComposerRelationshipType discussion. -- JimDeLaHunt 2007-12-17

Note that if a Release contains tracks recorded at different times by the same performer, and the Performer AR records the date attributes, then presumably the dates are different for different works, and so the Performer AR will be different for the different tracks. Hence adding date attributes to a performer AR on a release recorded in multiple sessions by the same performer probably forces the AR from the Release level to the track level. -- JimDeLaHunt 2007-12-17