Levels in the structure of works

[ListMyCDs.com]

Also

Number opera

[MetaTunes]

Ok, I take the point that “number” can have a specific meaning in a classical context as well as in musicals, but (perhaps mistakenly) I had inferred that it was being used in a more general sense. Either way, I think some clarification/guidance on its use would be helpful.

[reosarevok]

@MetaTunes

Either way, I think some clarification/guidance on its use would be helpful.

There’s a description for each attribute, visible on the relationship page. I’m quite open to improvements on the description texts

[MetaTunes]

@reosarevok

There’s a description for each attribute, visible on the relationship page

That looks pretty clear, thanks.

[loujin]

@stupidname

Editing works to use this would be a lot easier if we could set an attribute for all child works with one click.

@reosarevok

I fully expect something for that from @loujin pretty fast once he tries to edit this stuff

You know me too well reo

I updated my “edit subworks names from main work edit page” script (greasyfork, bitbucket): you can now use it to add/remove attributes (act, movement and so on) on all subworks at once. As usual, ping me if something’s not working

[ProfChris]

Apologies for not replying earlier - I seem to have missed some of the discussion. I agree with the structure proposed.
Suggest that “Collection” here is used to denote works which are related either by the composer (Wagner’s Ring Cycle), or by being frequently recorded/performed together (Bach’s Well Tempered Klavier Book 1).
IMO the use of this “Collection” relationship versus the Work/Series relationship needs clarification. Perhaps the latter should be reserved for Opus (Bach BWV series) and Published (Bach Anna Magdalene Notebook) collections, and renamed “Catalogued in” and “Published in”. I know that there will still be some anomalies, but it might help clear the fog.