RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
We have over 50 churches already, and with so much classical music being recorded in them it's only going to go up. Using "Other" for it when it's so obviously a type seems silly, so I'd like us to add it.

Expected RFV date: Jan 8

--
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Frederic Da Vitoria
2014/1/1 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]>
We have over 50 churches already, and with so much classical music being recorded in them it's only going to go up. Using "Other" for it when it's so obviously a type seems silly, so I'd like us to add it.

Expected RFV date: Jan 8

+1

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Rachel Dwight
+1
I seem to remember seeing a recording of THE ALFEE performing at the church on the Meiji Gakuin University campus.

On Jan 1, 2014, at 7:12 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria <[hidden email]> wrote:

2014/1/1 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]>
We have over 50 churches already, and with so much classical music being recorded in them it's only going to go up. Using "Other" for it when it's so obviously a type seems silly, so I'd like us to add it.

Expected RFV date: Jan 8

+1

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style


_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

LordSputnik
Is "Place of Worship" generic enough? Some religions don't worship a deity - in this case they'd just be "Religious Buildings" (eg. Buddhism). Perhaps "Community Building" would work too, for non-religious buildings which are considered important locally?

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

CallerNo6
In reply to this post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
On 01/01/2014 04:16 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
We have over 50 churches already, and with so much classical music being recorded in them it's only going to go up. Using "Other" for it when it's so obviously a type seems silly, so I'd like us to add it.

Expected RFV date: Jan 8

To me, "venue" is a generic term that covers pretty much anywhere music might be played for an audience (unless there's an audience in the studio during recording, I guess). It sounds like you're thinking of "venue" as being specifically clubs and theatres and those sorts of purpose-built places.

I'm not sure finer granularity would improve what we already have.

Alex / caller#6

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Frederic Da Vitoria
2014/1/2 caller#6 <[hidden email]>
On 01/01/2014 04:16 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
We have over 50 churches already, and with so much classical music being recorded in them it's only going to go up. Using "Other" for it when it's so obviously a type seems silly, so I'd like us to add it.

Expected RFV date: Jan 8

To me, "venue" is a generic term that covers pretty much anywhere music might be played for an audience (unless there's an audience in the studio during recording, I guess). It sounds like you're thinking of "venue" as being specifically clubs and theatres and those sorts of purpose-built places.

I'm not sure finer granularity would improve what we already have.

"generic term that covers pretty much anywhere music might be played": Isn't this precisely where we could do better? The acoustics of a church (which weren't primarily built for music) are completely different from those of a concert hall, as well as those of an open space such as a stadium. I believe there is here something which MusicBrainz could take into account. But I must confess (no pun intended) that I hadn't thought of what "Place of Worship" could mean. Acoustically, an old Romanesque or Gothic church does not sound like a small hall which could be used as a "place of worship'.

Now if this RFC is to be taken literally, from a usage point of view instead of an acoustical point of view, then I remove my +1. I wouldn't -1 either, I just wouldn't care.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

jesus2099
In reply to this post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
-1
I would prefer keeping simple VENUE for churches (rather than STUDIO).
I don’t think what important is the primary type of place.
IMO the important is the used type of place, whether VENUE or STUDIO.
where a VENUE place will contain more LIVE music recordings and STUDIO places will include more recording sessions.
 PATATE12   jesus2099   GOLD MASTER KING   FAKE E-MAIL ADDRESS 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Frederic Da Vitoria
2014/1/2 jesus2099 <[hidden email]>
-1
I would prefer keeping simple VENUE for churches (rather than STUDIO).
I don’t think what important is the primary type of place.
IMO the important is the used type of place, whether VENUE or STUDIO.
where a VENUE place will contain more LIVE music recordings and STUDIO
places will include more recording sessions.

IIUC, Nicolás' point is that currently users for some reason don't use Venue in this situation but Other, so that creating an explicit "Place of Worship" would allow at least to collect them.

Maybe simply adding a hint the interface would be enough?

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
In reply to this post by jesus2099
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:55 AM, jesus2099 <[hidden email]> wrote:
-1
I would prefer keeping simple VENUE for churches (rather than STUDIO).
I don’t think what important is the primary type of place.
IMO the important is the used type of place, whether VENUE or STUDIO.
where a VENUE place will contain more LIVE music recordings and STUDIO
places will include more recording sessions.

That makes no sense - churches are used for lots of non-live classical recordings as well as for lives. If you only care about whether the recording is live, you have the attribute on the recording-work rel anyway.
 
--
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Frederic Da Vitoria
2014/1/2 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]>
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:55 AM, jesus2099 <[hidden email]> wrote:
-1
I would prefer keeping simple VENUE for churches (rather than STUDIO).
I don’t think what important is the primary type of place.
IMO the important is the used type of place, whether VENUE or STUDIO.
where a VENUE place will contain more LIVE music recordings and STUDIO
places will include more recording sessions.

That makes no sense - churches are used for lots of non-live classical recordings as well as for lives. If you only care about whether the recording is live, you have the attribute on the recording-work rel anyway.

Hm, obviously I missed a (perfectly valid) part of your point :-P

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

LordSputnik
Concert Hall
Community Building/Religious Building
Stadium
Club
Arena
Outdoor Space
Theatre
Bandstand

Are all types that could be useful to have. I don't think we should split categories based on acoustic properties here, since it's an attribute of a place, and should go towards describing the type place, not its acoustic properties. Acoustic properties can be modified, and vary considerably between places of the same type (eg. sound baffles in concert halls).

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Frederic Da Vitoria
2014/1/2 Ben Ockmore <[hidden email]>
Concert Hall
Community Building/Religious Building
Stadium
Club
Arena
Outdoor Space
Theatre
Bandstand

Are all types that could be useful to have. I don't think we should split categories based on acoustic properties here, since it's an attribute of a place, and should go towards describing the type place, not its acoustic properties. Acoustic properties can be modified, and vary considerably between places of the same type (eg. sound baffles in concert halls).

I agree the acoustical properties of a place can be modified (although making a stadium sound like a real church would be tricky). But if you don't split them on acoustical properties, what useful types are left apart from those already existing? "Other" seems enough as it correctly describes churches. Splitting on the fact that a place is used or not for religion seems OT in MB IMO. I may be wrong, but I don't think a user will one day need an easy way to select together the cathedrals and the Buddhist temples. If not for acoustical reasons, why would we need to split Other?

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

jesus2099
In reply to this post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
Having lots of non musical place types will deserve no useful purpose imo, off topic in MB.
I put all non-studios in VENUES but now that I know there is OTHER, I think all non primmary music places should simply be OTHER indeed.
Having lots of types I would not know which one to pick. :)
 PATATE12   jesus2099   GOLD MASTER KING   FAKE E-MAIL ADDRESS 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

CallerNo6
In reply to this post by Frederic Da Vitoria
On 01/02/2014 03:30 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2014/1/2 Ben Ockmore <[hidden email]>
Concert Hall
Community Building/Religious Building
Stadium
Club
Arena
Outdoor Space
Theatre
Bandstand

Are all types that could be useful to have. I don't think we should split categories based on acoustic properties here, since it's an attribute of a place, and should go towards describing the type place, not its acoustic properties. Acoustic properties can be modified, and vary considerably between places of the same type (eg. sound baffles in concert halls).

I agree the acoustical properties of a place can be modified (although making a stadium sound like a real church would be tricky). But if you don't split them on acoustical properties, what useful types are left apart from those already existing? "Other" seems enough as it correctly describes churches. Splitting on the fact that a place is used or not for religion seems OT in MB IMO. I may be wrong, but I don't think a user will one day need an easy way to select together the cathedrals and the Buddhist temples. If not for acoustical reasons, why would we need to split Other?


I'm not sure what makes a church (or stadium) "other". Maybe it's a translation thing? To me, a church is as much a venue as anything.

It seems to me like finer granularity is better handled in wikidata or by some other authority (although I guess that only works for "notable" places, which could be a problem).

Alex / caller#6

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:49 PM, caller#6 <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 01/02/2014 03:30 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2014/1/2 Ben Ockmore <[hidden email]>
Concert Hall
Community Building/Religious Building
Stadium
Club
Arena
Outdoor Space
Theatre
Bandstand

Are all types that could be useful to have. I don't think we should split categories based on acoustic properties here, since it's an attribute of a place, and should go towards describing the type place, not its acoustic properties. Acoustic properties can be modified, and vary considerably between places of the same type (eg. sound baffles in concert halls).

I agree the acoustical properties of a place can be modified (although making a stadium sound like a real church would be tricky). But if you don't split them on acoustical properties, what useful types are left apart from those already existing? "Other" seems enough as it correctly describes churches. Splitting on the fact that a place is used or not for religion seems OT in MB IMO. I may be wrong, but I don't think a user will one day need an easy way to select together the cathedrals and the Buddhist temples. If not for acoustical reasons, why would we need to split Other?


I'm not sure what makes a church (or stadium) "other". Maybe it's a translation thing? To me, a church is as much a venue as anything.

It seems to me like finer granularity is better handled in wikidata or by some other authority (although I guess that only works for "notable" places, which could be a problem).

For me something being a "venue" certainly implies its main purpose is music - a church does feel very much not like a venue to me.

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Frederic Da Vitoria
In reply to this post by CallerNo6
2014/1/2 caller#6 <[hidden email]>
On 01/02/2014 03:30 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2014/1/2 Ben Ockmore <[hidden email]>
Concert Hall
Community Building/Religious Building
Stadium
Club
Arena
Outdoor Space
Theatre
Bandstand

Are all types that could be useful to have. I don't think we should split categories based on acoustic properties here, since it's an attribute of a place, and should go towards describing the type place, not its acoustic properties. Acoustic properties can be modified, and vary considerably between places of the same type (eg. sound baffles in concert halls).

I agree the acoustical properties of a place can be modified (although making a stadium sound like a real church would be tricky). But if you don't split them on acoustical properties, what useful types are left apart from those already existing? "Other" seems enough as it correctly describes churches. Splitting on the fact that a place is used or not for religion seems OT in MB IMO. I may be wrong, but I don't think a user will one day need an easy way to select together the cathedrals and the Buddhist temples. If not for acoustical reasons, why would we need to split Other?


I'm not sure what makes a church (or stadium) "other". Maybe it's a translation thing? To me, a church is as much a venue as anything.

It seems to me like finer granularity is better handled in wikidata or by some other authority (although I guess that only works for "notable" places, which could be a problem)

From https://musicbrainz.org/doc/Place :
A place that has live artistic performances as one of its primary functions, such as a concert hall or multi-purpose arena.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

CallerNo6
On 01/02/2014 07:58 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2014/1/2 caller#6 <[hidden email]>

I'm not sure what makes a church (or stadium) "other". Maybe it's a translation thing? To me, a church is as much a venue as anything.

From https://musicbrainz.org/doc/Place :
A place that has live artistic performances as one of its primary functions, such as a concert hall or multi-purpose arena.

Aha! Thanks :-)

That definition is much more narrow than the casual English word.

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Alex Mauer
In reply to this post by Frederic Da Vitoria
On 01/02/2014 09:58 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>     A place that has live artistic performances as one of its primary
>     functions, such as a concert hall or multi-purpose arena.

Is that not the case for churches?

They may not be musical (though music is often included!) but I would
count services and/or sermons as “live artistic performances”.

I bet we even have some in the database…

I don’t see a need for a separate place type for these, but I don’t mind
it either.



_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Frederic Da Vitoria
In reply to this post by CallerNo6
2014/1/2 caller#6 <[hidden email]>
On 01/02/2014 07:58 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2014/1/2 caller#6 <[hidden email]>

I'm not sure what makes a church (or stadium) "other". Maybe it's a translation thing? To me, a church is as much a venue as anything.

From https://musicbrainz.org/doc/Place :
A place that has live artistic performances as one of its primary functions, such as a concert hall or multi-purpose arena.

Aha! Thanks :-)

That definition is much more narrow than the casual English word.

I don't know English well enough to have an opinion about this :-/

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC STYLE-279: Add "Place of Worship" as place type

Frederic Da Vitoria
In reply to this post by Alex Mauer
2014/1/2 Alex Mauer <[hidden email]>
On 01/02/2014 09:58 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>     A place that has live artistic performances as one of its primary
>     functions, such as a concert hall or multi-purpose arena.

Is that not the case for churches?

They may not be musical (though music is often included!) but I would
count services and/or sermons as “live artistic performances”.

I bet we even have some in the database…

I don’t see a need for a separate place type for these, but I don’t mind
it either

I hadn't thought of that :-D

Yes you are right, one could consider those as art. But I am not convinced the Vatican would agree with you, art has often been viewed as something quite questionable, at least in past times. So if the Artist's Intent is that his work is not considered as art, can we consider it as art?

Just for the sake of argument, because obviously in the definition above "artistic performance" meant anything recorded in MB.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
12