i have interest in this "Instrument Secretary" thing.
Robert Kaye wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2006, at 7:47 AM, Don Redman wrote: >> No not a single Instrument, but I think that Mo's wholly new instrment >> tree does need testing. For example it might need some "other" leaves, >> but this is difficult to tell in theory. >> >> And finally I am growing tired of all these debates about what should >> be and what should not be. Testing coud help us all to move the focus >> onto the question whether a solution is *vaible*, whether it works. > > Here are a few thoughts on this matter: > > 1. Mo has an improved instrument tree, we should take a look at it as a > starting point. Let's get it loaded on the test server after this sunday. > 2. We should appoint an instrument secretary, apart from the main style > secretary, who oversees the instrument tree and makes decisions about > when/where to add new instruments. > 3. I think we should enter in MOST instruments, but not all. I would > suggest using criteria like: > - If the instrument has a wikipedia entry (that is not marked for > deletion or major fixes) it should be added > - If not, the person wishing to add the instrument, should find N > references to this instrument being used on albums. I would think that 5 > references might be a good starting point. > - Instruments with less than N references should simply be marked as > "other". Or perhaps "other wind", "other strings", "other percussion". > >> -- > > --ruaok Somewhere in Texas a village is *still* missing its idiot. > > Robert Kaye -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mayhem-chaos.net > > _______________________________________________ > Musicbrainz-style mailing list > Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style > _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
