headers
StoneyBoh | 1 Feb 2008 01:47
Favicon

Re: Musicbrainz-style Digest, Vol 33, Issue 52

A couple of more points of view from a non-classical editor, who has a 
few classical CDs:

Leiv Hellebo wrote:

> But I am a bit shocked after my CD ripper told me yesterday that a
> simple one and a half minute Mozart solo piano track is called:
>
> "Modulating Prelude to Concerto for Piano in F major transitioning to C
> major, K. Anh C 15.11/(K3) 626aII/I/KV deest Fr 1765a" [1]
>
> This title behooves the study room more than the living room. Do we have
> to have to all of this in the track titles?
I agree.  Are all classical tracks going to look like this?  I hope this 
is an extreme example.  But if my tagger returned this, I would 
immediately assume MusicBrainz is some high falutin database, and is 
definitely not for me, so I will just tag them myself.  The "casual" 
classical listener doesn't care for all that detail, and so will, I 
believe, be overwhelmed - just in tagging what they have, let alone 
trying to contribute new info.  Now I am not saying that such detail 
does not have a place in MBz, it certainly does (since MBz should be an 
encyclopedia of music too), but I would offer that the track title is 
not the right place for that.  I like the suggestion of others have of 
linking to the master list from the track, but allowing a much more 
"casual-user-friendly" track title for tagging.

E.g. if I want to tag Beethoven's Fourth Symphony, then that is what I 
want my tag to say.  I don't care about opus numbers or tempos or 
anything like that.  I know that many people do, and that is great, and 
MBz should serve them.  But don't throw me and others like me out with
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Brian Schweitzer | 1 Feb 2008 03:19
Picon

Re: [Clean up CSG] Capitalization (and placement) of types and tempos

> But I am a bit shocked after my CD ripper told me yesterday that a
> simple one and a half minute Mozart solo piano track is called:
>
> "Modulating Prelude to Concerto for Piano in F major transitioning to C
> major, K. Anh C 15.11/(K3) 626aII/I/KV deest Fr 1765a" [1]
>
> This title behooves the study room more than the living room. Do we have
> to have to all of this in the track titles?

While the point is admittedly valid, I would draw some exception to
the particular example chosen, given that it is perhaps one of the top
2 Mozart works with the absolutely most confusing history - and of all
works that I can think of, still the one that draws the most questions
- and there, specifically *because* most liners only list "Modulating
Prelude" (on the few CDs which have this work).  Would the Brilliant
Classics listing be any less "extreme", even with the non-K6 catalog
numbers stripped out, if you put the CD in and got

Prelude Transitions for Piano for Concertos for Piano in C major, K.
Anh C 15.11 Nos. a-x: (no tempo indication) - andantino / Modulating
Prelude for Piano in F major to E minor, K. deest NMA IX/27/2 No. 2:
(no tempo indication)

for a track title?

I agree, the titles can be complex.  But if you put in your common
Symphonies 40 and 41 CD, you get:

1. Symphony No. 40 in G minor without clarinets, K. 550: I. Allegro molto
2. Symphony No. 40 in G minor without clarinets, K. 550: II. Andante
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Brian Schweitzer | 1 Feb 2008 05:18
Picon

Re: [Clean up CSG] Typography (was: Capitalization (and placement))

While working on something entirely unrelated, I stumbled onto this,
at Wikipedia.  Though Musicbrainz is not a wiki, it would seem that if
they can do it generally, the distinction between hyphen, dash,
en-dash, and em-dash ought to not scare folks who are dealing with the
complexities of CSG... :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOS#Dashes

While we're discussing typography, if I can risk bringing it up, does
anyone feel strongly against the use of … instead of ...?  (the
ellipses character vs 3 periods)
It has three benefits:
1) with our current 255 character limitations, it's a savings of two characters,
2) It's more correct typography,
and 3) On the tagging end, starting with … is valid (in Windows) and
doesn't make it a hidden file/dir (in linux) (not sure how the mac
handles initial periods), and ending with it is valid (in windows)
(not sure if ending in a period is an issue in linux/mac)...

Brian
Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Aaron Cooper | 1 Feb 2008 05:44
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Re: [Clean up CSG] Typography (was: Capitalization (and placement))

On 31-Jan-08, at 11:18 PM, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> While working on something entirely unrelated, I stumbled onto this,
> at Wikipedia.  Though Musicbrainz is not a wiki, it would seem that if
> they can do it generally, the distinction between hyphen, dash,
> en-dash, and em-dash ought to not scare folks who are dealing with the
> complexities of CSG... :)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOS#Dashes
>
> While we're discussing typography, if I can risk bringing it up, does
> anyone feel strongly against the use of … instead of ...?  (the
> ellipses character vs 3 periods)
> It has three benefits:
> 1) with our current 255 character limitations, it's a savings of two  
> characters,
> 2) It's more correct typography,
> and 3) On the tagging end, starting with … is valid (in Windows) and
> doesn't make it a hidden file/dir (in linux) (not sure how the mac
> handles initial periods), and ending with it is valid (in windows)
> (not sure if ending in a period is an issue in linux/mac)...

Starting files/directories with a period makes them hidden for Macs,  
too.  Ending with a period doesn't seem to be a problem though.  I'm  
cool with replacing ... with … (it's pretty easy on a Mac: Option + :).

-Aaron
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Lauri Watts | 1 Feb 2008 07:26
Picon

Re: Re: [Clean up CSG] Typography (was: Capitalization (and placement))

On Feb 1, 2008 5:44 AM, Aaron Cooper <cooperaa@...> wrote:
> On 31-Jan-08, at 11:18 PM, Brian Schweitzer wrote:

> Starting files/directories with a period makes them hidden for Macs,
> too.  Ending with a period doesn't seem to be a problem though.  I'm
> cool with replacing ... with … (it's pretty easy on a Mac: Option + :).

http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/MiscellaneousGuideline?highlight=%28ellipsis%29

Do read all the way down, and excuse me for finding the final comment on the
page to be slightly ironic.

--

-- 
Lauri Watts
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Brian Schweitzer | 1 Feb 2008 10:17
Picon

Re: [Clean up CSG] Typography (was: Capitalization (and placement))

Lauri Watts wrote:
>> Starting files/directories with a period makes them hidden for Macs,
>> too.  Ending with a period doesn't seem to be a problem though.  I'm
>> cool with replacing ... with … (it's pretty easy on a Mac: Option + :).
>
>http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/MiscellaneousGuideline?highlight=%28ellipsis%29
>
>Do read all the way down, and excuse me for finding the final comment on the
>page to be slightly ironic.

Thank you Lauri, for finding the comment I referred to in #7 in
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2008-January/005608.html
:

"7.  No unicode typography.  I can't find the wikipage, perhaps Jim
remembers which it is.  But we say to use -, not the dashes, "" not
the language correct quotes, etc.  Supposedly this is to maintain
compatibility - but right in the middle of CSG, we have a
Windows-invalid character (the colon), plus we mix question marks in"

(The reference to Jim being because, well, the only thing I remembered
about the page was that it was a response to a comment he had left.)

Now, if I can quote myself, perhaps you'll see the difference between
what I said in that wikicomment, and what I've said here,

"Now, not to be misunderstood - I do wish correct typography was
something we could pull off. But considering how many basic
misspellings we get, and how confused 99% of editors get when trying
to deal with more complex formulations like CSG, I'd think asking
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Jim DeLaHunt | 1 Feb 2008 10:29
Favicon

Re: Re: [Clean up CSG] Typography (was: Capitalization (and placement))


Too funny! :-)

Lauri Watts wrote:
> 
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/MiscellaneousGuideline?highlight=%28ellipsis%29
> 
> Do read all the way down, and excuse me for finding the final comment on
> the page to be slightly ironic.
> 

-----
     -- http://jdlh.com/ Jim DeLaHunt , Vancouver, Canada  • 
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/JimDeLaHunt

--

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-Clean-up-CSG--Typography-%28was%3A-Capitalization-%28and-placement%29%29-tp15175325s2885p15223195.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jim DeLaHunt | 1 Feb 2008 10:43
Favicon

Re: [Clean up CSG] Typography (was: Capitalization (and placement))


Sorry I've been absent from this thread. I've been away from email for most
of this week.

I'm one of the people who is quite comfortable typing in correct typography
in my classical track titles.  I had someone object to my using it —
specifically em-dashes — in tempo markings on one track, saying that
em-dashes were *forbidden* in MB entries.

I think it's a big step forward to agree that correct typography is no
longer forbidden in the scope of the CSG. It would be nice to have it
encouraged in MB as a whole.

Brian and others have sketched out a scheme where the CSG describes what
typography is correct, and encourages us keeners to type it in track titles
and master work lists; and where the CSG also describes what simple
punctuation is good enough to be really helpful. A whole lot of people will
contribute simple punctuation, and that's great.  We've heard a couple of
ways automated processes can upgrade the simple punctuation to correct
typography.  

Do we have a consensus that it's OK for the CSG to define and encourage
correct typography, and define and welcome simple punctuation, in classical
ReleaseTitles and TrackTitles?  If we do, I'm confident that we can come up
with a scheme that makes an automated editing tool feasible.

Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> 
> ... am I suggesting that anyone need to deal with [correct typography],
> other than those making the master lists?  Very very very much no.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 9 comments |
headers
Leiv Hellebo | 1 Feb 2008 10:51
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [Clean up CSG] Typography (was: Capitalization (and placement))

Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
> 
> I'm one of the people who is quite comfortable typing in correct typography
> in my classical track titles.  I had someone object to my using it —
> specifically em-dashes — in tempo markings on one track, saying that
> em-dashes were *forbidden* in MB entries.
> 

If you're referring to this edit, your memory is slightly off the mark.

http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=7872026
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jim DeLaHunt | 1 Feb 2008 11:18
Favicon

Re: [Clean up CSG] Various other issues


Quick replies to the laundry list of issues.

Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> 
> 1. I finally realized where that ugly (feat.) concept we've rejected for
> classical came from - it's in the official CSG, second track title
> example, "The Lark Ascending (feat. violin: Tasmin Little)".
> 

The biggest problem with the CSG is that it's been so long since it got a
systematic review, and closure on the dozens of open discussion items.  To
my mind, that's most of what makes it difficult now.

I came in as a new contributor, read the CSG, and put (feat.) in my track
titles. I got pushback. If we don't want newbie editors putting (feat.) in
track titles, then strike it from the CSG. I'm fine with that.

Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> 
> 2. Here it does have that tempos ought to use ItalianCaps, though it very
> specifically only talks about Italian tempos, not Italian work types or
> tempos/types in other languages: ...
> 

I'm not sure what resolution you are proposing.  I'm guessing we should say
something like:

"Tempo markings are capitalised as appropriate for phrases in the language
of the tempo markings. Italian tempo markings follow
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane