Re: [mb-users] ARs for references in works?

Den 02-10-2013 15:47, Frederic Da Vitoria skrev:
> I understand, but OTOH in this example the edit note, although not quite
> to the point, would not be completely wrong. It might even, in a
> slightly less obvious example, help users to understand where the AR
> comes from.

If someone needs to know where the relationship comes from, they can 
check the edit history - it is possible to filter on relationship types, 
so it should be quite possible to limit a search to only the edits 
related to the "references" AR with few false positives.

> I'd rather have a few AR annotations not very informative
> (although not factually wrong) than mostly empty AR annotations.

Far most edits have no edit note. I would also not wantto see most of my 
own edit notes as AR annotations.

> But we
> don't copy the note to the annotation, users will have to fill the
> annotation manually. I know from experience that commenting things is
> always the last thing users do, even if they have nothing else to do.

Commenting things should only be necessary where the system itself does 
not provide enough information. (E.g., have a comment on a Discogs link 
annotation "This is Artist's Discogs page" or on a band membership 
relationship would the instrument attribute set to drums have the 
comment "Artist was Band's drummer" would be pretty superfluous.)
As long as relationships are self-explanatory (which hopefully most 
are...), they should not need a comment.

If users, OTOH, bother going through the process of adding a Work-Entity 
"references" relationship, hopefully they will also care enough to note 
it in the AR comment - esp. if it's possible to enter the comment while 
making the AR in the first place.

To be honest though: I'm not wholly convinced that these ARs really 
demand the schema change that would be needed for ARs to have 
comments/annotations - annotating the Work(s) involved should be fine. 
E.g., "Song About Awesome Thing" could have the AR "references My 
Awesome Thing" and an annotation "Song About Awesome Thing is in the 
same key and has the same chord progression in the chorus as My Awesome 
Thing and also alludes to the subjects discussed in My Awesome Thing in 
the lyrical content throughout the song." - and that would be a perfect 
use for Work annotations, IMHO.

> ([...] or preventing the editors from correcting
> it somehow)...

That smells like a strawman to me. Obviously any such system would not 
be implemented so that could happen - and if it did, it would treated as 
a bug and fixed ASAP.

-- 
Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen <http://freso.dk/>