On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 00:01:27 +0100, Rod Begbie wrote:
> OK folks, it's been a couple of weeks since anyone has added anything
> to
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/GettingRidOfFeaturingArtistStyle>
> Because I'm fed up with 'mo' dicking around with my moderations, I'd
> like to try putting this to a (completely non-binding) vote, using the
> Apache Lazy Concensus rules.
>
> Reply to this thread, and simply say +1 if you agree, -1 if you
> disagree, or a number in between if you're opinion is in between (see
> bottom of this mail for examples). Also say if you're a member of the
> Style Council, or just a mailinglist participant. Next Saturday
> (12th), I'll tot-up the votes.
>
> PROPOSAL: We change FeaturingArtistStyle to read: "When two or more
> artists collaborate on a track or release, file the track/release
> under the primary artist, and then add "performed on" relationships to
> the secondary artists. If no artist can be considered secondary,
> create a new artist in the form 'Artist 1 & Artist 2' and add
> "collaborated on" relationships to the artists."
As I said before I do not think this is a matter of _storing_ data only.
Since there is no system in place to _use_ the data, should it only be
stored in ARs (i.e. the website doe not display it on the album view, the
tagger cannot use it) I am strongly opposed to change the stuile
guidelines in a way that they render data unusable.
Furthermore I do not think that _any_ proposal is mature enough for
voting, yet. This inclues yours since it does not adress the issues I
mention above. Therefore I think voting on anyting is premature.
So, that's a --1.
DonRedman
--
Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages:
Visit
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation
around! :-)
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
