tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759829936301057674.post152328249127694134..comments2023-10-17T15:09:44.748+01:00Comments on About Tag: The Music of FluidDB I: Albums, Tracks and Songsnjrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08980758986023344486noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759829936301057674.post-69646708278091779052011-04-04T07:00:58.747+01:002011-04-04T07:00:58.747+01:00Michael H:
Right, the multiple directors is a goo...Michael H:<br /><br />Right, the multiple directors is a good one and I agree that an IMDB identifier is better as a separate tag. So title + year does seem good (though, like you, I could name a lot more film directors than years...in fact, I'm not sure I could get the year of any film correct off the top of my head).<br /><br />I suppose people from some continents might think 'movie:' was a better prefix than 'film:', but I'm not from that continent ;-)njrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08980758986023344486noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759829936301057674.post-11973493966151861452011-04-03T23:26:30.974+01:002011-04-03T23:26:30.974+01:00Wow, that was a quick response ;-)
I think identi...Wow, that was a quick response ;-)<br /><br />I think identifying films by year would probably be a good idea. Though I tend to think of films by their title, then by the director, some have multiple directors. One film, "Paris, je t'aime" came out a few years ago and it has over twenty directors. I don't know if there's a limit on the amount of data that can be in an about tag.<br /><br />An IMDB identifier might be good for a separate tag, but I don't think it would be great for an about tag. I've come across some films that aren't in IMDB, though it's rare. An IMDB identifier is almost like an ISBN. Not all books have ISBN's and not all movies make it into IMDB.Michael Hhttp://www.gottahavacuppamocha.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759829936301057674.post-77716046065271245602011-04-03T19:25:15.634+01:002011-04-03T19:25:15.634+01:00Michael H:
I haven't specifically thought abo...Michael H:<br /><br />I haven't specifically thought about films, and I'm not aware of anyone's having systematically put any in, but, as you might expect, I like the film convention you suggest and if you use it and let me know I'll (1) add it to the reference page (2) add it to the about tag library and (3) (perhaps) add a category to about tag app (slightly more work, but not too much).<br /><br />Is it the best convention? I think it's great, but there probably two alternatives worth considering. Clearly, the film title isn't enough, and adding the director seems very natural. A clear alternative (perhaps in more common use outside FluidDB) is to add the release year instead of the director 'film:pulp fiction (1994)'; I'm not saying that would be better, but it would certainly be an alternative. And I guess the third practical option would be to use some kind of IMDB identifier --- probably the page URL or the ID part of it. I don't like that nearly as much because it requires a specific look-up, whereas I think a great property for about tags is that they can be constructed for information you would naturally have for an object. Title clearly fits this, and director and year are pretty natural too.<br /><br />Good luck, and let me know what you decide and I'll do some of the above (and blog too, perhaps).<br /><br />Nicknjrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08980758986023344486noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759829936301057674.post-37996514378035818962011-04-03T19:12:58.740+01:002011-04-03T19:12:58.740+01:00Someone on IRC encouraged me to look more at your ...Someone on IRC encouraged me to look more at your blog for info about standards or conventions for listing books in Fluidinfo. It's really been helpful, and I plan on trying out fdb soon to see what it can do. <br /><br />So far I've noticed that you've described conventions for many things, including books, songs, albums, tracks, but I was wondering if you've thought about films. I did separate queries to Fluidinfo for 'fluiddb/about matches "film"' and '..."movie"' but both of those came up with a ton of urls to BoingBoing and other sites, but few if any films. <br /><br />Using your book conventions, I created an object film:pulp fiction (quentin tarantino), using the director in place of the author. It's a start, but it might be nice to know if there any thoughts or existing conventions. I've got about 900+ movies I want to add then tag for a possible app.Michael Hhttp://www.gottahavacuppamocha.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759829936301057674.post-17707241261466864832011-01-25T16:40:04.950+00:002011-01-25T16:40:04.950+00:00thisfred
Wow, what a fabulous-looking site. Tha...thisfred<br /><br />Wow, what a fabulous-looking site. Thanks so much for pointing it out. As you say, that looks like a tremendous resource, and licensing looks like it would be easy to get a lot of very useful stuff very painlessly. I haven't immediately seen whether they have a way of identifying tracks/albums etc. that would be suitable for an about tag, but it certainly merits looking into.<br /><br />You're obviously right when you say that there is more than the simple scheme I discuss here caters for perfectly, even for non-classical music, but I think some of it comes down to what level you want to work at. FluidDB can cater for lots of different levels, and I imagine that we will end up with different conventions for different "levels" of the the music hierarchy. The case I wanted to tackle first is the one that I guess most people will care about most of the time. I think that is the conceptual work --- you know, Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd or Summertime by Billie Holiday or whatever. Clearly, you could (entirely validly) have different objects for different recordings of Summertime by Billie Holiday, or even for (say) the original and the re-mastered version of Dark Side of the Moon, or even the CD vs. the LP etc. I'm not wanting to discourage this at all, but that's not really what the convention I'm discussing here for about tags is trying to do. (Similarly, for books, you could distinguish the paperback from the hardback, and all the different publishers and editions, but the book-1 convention deliberately operates at the level of the "work" because, for most purposes, it seems more useful to combine them. I accept that the case is less clear-cut for music, but in general I still think the same is true.)<br /><br />Thanks again for a really useful comment. I'll look at Musicbrainz some more.<br /><br />Nicknjrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08980758986023344486noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759829936301057674.post-5758619806647989952011-01-25T15:49:07.368+00:002011-01-25T15:49:07.368+00:00I'd recommend looking at musicbrainz.org, whic...I'd recommend looking at musicbrainz.org, which has solved a lot of the same problems already, and even if you decide to make different decisions, they make their enormous data-set available for free, so you could use it to import a lot of this information from.<br /><br />Things are, as you say, complicated, and I think the above barely scratches the surface. While classical music does have some unique metadata challenges, I wouldn't say that popular music is any simpler, when you consider remixes, mash-ups (often listing 'Artist A vs. Artist B' as a track's artist,) live recordings, bootlegs, and albums that are released with different track listings in different countries. <br /><br />Musicbrainz may not have solved all of these problems conclusively, but they're the closest thing to perfection I've seen, and they are continually addressing new issues.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04987961040938197252noreply@blogger.com