Question about redundant catalogue numbers in child work titles

MusicBrainz Classical
1

Hi all,

I have a question about the preferred titling of child works in hierarchical classical works.

For example:

Parent work:
19 Hungarian Rhapsodies, S. 244 / R. 106

Child work:
19 Hungarian Rhapsodies, S. 244 / R. 106: No. 2 in C-sharp minor, S. 244 no. 2

I understand (and actually like) the MusicBrainz guideline that child works should contain the full parent title, so the canonical work title becomes:

19 Hungarian Rhapsodies, S. 244 / R. 106: No. 2 in C-sharp minor

What I don’t understand is the additional “S. 244 no. 2” at the end.

Since the parent already identifies the work as part of S. 244 / R. 106, isn’t this catalogue reference redundant? Or is there a specific reason why the child work should repeat its own catalogue designation?

I’m asking because I’m trying to understand the intended modelling, not because I want to change this particular work.

Thanks!

2

I think that’s a mistake and would remove it. My guess is that someone added the parent work title to the beginning of the name and forgot to remove the catalog number from the end.

3

Yes, this edit: https://musicbrainz.org/edit/52685201

4

Thanks @VBZPPlNQyJ for your reply! I’ll remove it!

Best,

Gyorgy

1 Like