Since a work in bookbrainz can’t be an anthology per definition the possibility of chosing it as type of work should be removed.
I think that must have been mentioned long ago, but it seems to have been forgotten on the way.
1 Like
Personally I’m not entirely sure that’s true. “Anthology can’t be a work” I mean.
I actually think we might allow it - in most cases I think there is some “work” done to a collection of works, Neil Gaiman’s Novella books come to mind, where both the selection and order was something he did on purpose. I’d call that this good enough to qualify as a “work”.
The term anthology typically categorizes collections of shorter works by different authors. I can’t see how this should be a “work” in the sense we use the term in bookbrainz.
An anthology is a collection of works by different authors: Anthology - Wikipedia
A collection is a selection of works by the same author: Short story collection - Wikipedia
Collection can also apply to poetry and essays.
On BookBrainz the contents of an anthology or collection are Works; the anthology or collection title only exists as an Edition Group. I agree it shouldn’t be there. I think I did mention it many moons ago. Repetition might have the desired effect.
P.S. I notice that Wikipedia states that anthology can also apply to works by the same author but I have never used the term that way.
1 Like
I found my previous bad-tempered comment.
1 Like
Actually it is so if we decide it is so, and I, as BB Stylecat (equivalent of MB Styledude @reosarevok) am of the opinion that that model is outdated.
I am of the opinion that anthologies/short-story-collections can be works.
Not always! But that it is possible.
We have Work-Work relationships for “part of”,
Where it is applicable will have to be on a case by case decision - it’s possibly not super common.
But that’s exactly what our job here as revisioners on BB is! To try to figure out the edge cases :D
I wholeheartedly agree and I have argued for collections, anthologies and omnibuses to be included as Works on BookBrainz.
Many collections are extremely well known in their own right. Just some examples:
Men Without Women by Ernest Hemingway
For Your Eyes Only by Ian Fleming
Murder in the Mews by Agatha Christie
Skeleton Crew by Stephen King
I personally believe it is wrong to overlook them as Works. I fought tooth and nail for the inclusion of collection, anthology, omnibus titles as Works on Bookogs and I eventually won the argument. Although Bookogs was wound up about 18 months later, my experience was that that outcome was correct. Not everyone submitting an anthology of 200+ poems has the time to create Works for each one. Faced with that prospect I know I wouldn’t bother!
I will add that it can’t be an ad hoc decision made by the individual user otherwise the database becomes a hodgepodge of rubbish where no one understands the rules. Either collection, anthology or omnibus titles are treated as Works or they’re not. Simple!
3 Likes
This sounds like a very weighty threat 
(that’s all I have to contribute sorry, loving all the work on Bookogs at the moment)
3 Likes
It is hardly a threat as I was very passionate about the now defunct Bookogs. The fire has been completely extinguished so don’t be too concerned😌
Hah no no it’s good, let everyone know there’s precedence and that you’re a veteran! Hopefully you will be just as passionate about bookbrainz
1 Like
I totally agree and that is not a big surprise, I guess.
:
I also agree with The GoldieCrustieFury here: case by case decisions in an open source database are not feasible when having hundreds of users with different opinions. I’ve seen and lead hundreds of fruitless discussions because of decisions left to the users.
And I also think that we won’t be able to find clear rules for a statement “This collection/anthology is/is not a Work”.
So we have to go for all or nothing.
1 Like