Re: [ARSCLIST] Record databases--was: MP3 player for public

[D P Ingram <darren@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 27 apr 2007, at 06.37, Steven C. Barr(x) wrote:
> Actually, firstest (is that a word?) you have to decide exactly  
> what data
> you wish to collect...that is, design your data tables (fields: names,
> sizes, formats, usw...) so that phonorecords are adequately (as you
> see it) documented!

Yes, that has been done. But, until one then a) tries to eat one's  
own dog food with actual real life examples and b) let people  who  
know a lot about this stuff/have perhaps their own pet hates and  
likes and their own peculiar way of doing things kick the tyres  you  
cannot really see that. That is what is being worked on presently.   
It is then easier to add certain fields if demanded.

> You can go all the way from my VERY basic "wotinell do I have really?"
> data table, which lists label, number and a few remarks...to the  
> Abrams
> Files, which are a set of 160-byte text-based data records...to an
> elaborate affair like my personal Access-based catalog database...!

I am a little concerned that this project will be a never ending  
thing that grows like topsy and whilst some might want to know the  
date a given track was taken out of publication some instead might  
prefer to know the colour of the lavatory paper used by the lead  
engineer at the reserve stamping plant in the non-primary market  
marketplace.   The "aim" will be to allow structured access and input  
of the core and maybe (to some) not so core information but in a  
regulated manner that provides greater data integrity and overall  
archive quality information. Much "easier" yet harder than just  
importing data sources from hither to tither.

But that is the grand plan. But first one has to get "baby" to crawl  
before it can walk :)
>

> And, of course, what also logically would need to be inputted would
> be the content of as many discographic works (either print/paper
> based or digital) as possible...if only to avoid reinventing a
Yes, the key is to use secondary sourcing and attributation as well  
as catalogue X might contradict internal record Y. But tying those up  
might help others.

> One hopes you are...or know...a 100+ WPM typist...
I used to be pretty fast... :) The "joy" of this is, if it works how  
I envisage, that people might build up little bits of information  
from different sources as they check out things. I.e. you have put in  
a track you have and maybe it is missing a picture (or you have a  
better copy) so you can contribute that fix.

Darren