Composer Work Lists

Any posts related to the categorization and standardization of IMSLP

Moderators: vinteuil, Davydov

Post Reply
Davydov
Copyright Reviewer
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:31 am
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human
Contact:

Composer Work Lists

Post by Davydov »

IMSLP now have almost 450 of these work lists, with a wide variety of formats. For example:
So the question is, which of the above formats do you find the most useful? Is it helpful to include as much details as possible and fully sortable columns (like the Liszt example), or does this become too cluttered and unwieldy? Which sortable columns do you find the most useful?

Your views will be helpful in deciding the future development of the work lists, so please speak up!
NLewis
active poster
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 2:25 am
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Composer Work Lists

Post by NLewis »

I prefer the following information in a sortable format:

Opus No. / Catalog # — As published
Title — used on IMSLP in accordance with naming guidelines
Key — the principal key of the work. (<--- IF applicable)
Date — the year(s) of composition, where known.
Scoring (Forces) — the instrumentation used.
Genre — as used by IMSLP's categorization system.
Notes — can include premires, dedications, related works, etc.


In some cases I like to include the duration of the work and the publisher, but it really depends. This is probably best. It creates a clean and sortable list with a lot of information, which users have found very helpful.
Notenschreiber
active poster
Posts: 727
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:31 pm

Re: Composer Work Lists

Post by Notenschreiber »

I like the third one most, becuase it is fully sortable and contains more information than list 2.
vinteuil
Groundskeeper
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 3:01 pm
notabot: YES
notabot2: Bot
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: Composer Work Lists

Post by vinteuil »

I think that more information is better, especially with our clear legends—but it is a lot of work to create. Bravo on all of your efforts in this field.
Formerly known as "perlnerd666"
NLewis
active poster
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 2:25 am
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Composer Work Lists

Post by NLewis »

More information is better, but we can't let the lists get too cluttered. The sort of "generally accepted format" is the CTKDFGN format.
steltz
active poster
Posts: 1861
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 2:30 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Composer Work Lists

Post by steltz »

I like the Liszt and Mozart pages the best. I agree that more information is better, but with the composers with hundreds of works, the Mozart page with sections for each genre seems the most logical, and is the way Grove does their Lis(z)ts. :lol:
bsteltz
Davydov
Copyright Reviewer
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:31 am
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human
Contact:

Re: Composer Work Lists

Post by Davydov »

Thanks for those replies, which have given me a few ideas. To help reduce the size of some of the tables I've created a list of abbreviations for instruments, which the tagging team should find familiar :)
NLewis
active poster
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 2:25 am
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Composer Work Lists

Post by NLewis »

Thanks Davydov, it seems useful.
Post Reply