As some of you may have noticed, there is a new field in many work pages, the "I-Catalog Number". This is intended to serve as an automated catalog system, uniquely identifying works for a given composer. The catalog number is tied to a particular page, and will survive page moves. If a page moves to a different composer category, there is a particular logic that the system will follow in reassigning the number, but in any event it guarantees that the number is unique for a given composer however the page is moved.
Hopefully this will help especially in cases where a composer has no universally acknowledged catalog. Let me know of any questions/comments.
I-Catalog Number
Moderator: kcleung
-
jujimufu
- active poster
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 6:26 pm
- notabot: 42
- notabot2: Bot
- Location: in your closet (no really. check.)
- Contact:
Re: I-Catalog Number
I have a few questions, after noticing "I-Catalogue Numbers" on my compositions, in the form of "INP-28" etc.
a) are these added automatically, if so what are the criteria and why do some of my work pages have it and others don't?
b) what is their function? If this is an arbitrary cataloguing system only used by IMSLP, then does this mean IMSLP then becomes the authority on said composers' cataloguing? If I were, say, to upload my works on another music score library, and they used their own INP numbering, then which one would be regarded as authentic / correct?
c) how is the numbering system judged? is the method transparent so anyone could clearly see a way of keeping adding these numbers manually? For example my piece model5 (INP 28) was composed 4 years after my piece Origami (INP 29), yet the latter is one number higher than the former. If it's not chronological, then what is the logic?
c) would it make sense to be applied to composers who are dead and whose output is therefore unlikely to be increased other than posthumously? does it make sense for composers (like myself) who keep adding works to my page, sometimes adding older works I had not uploaded earlier, therefore potentially "messing up" the numbering to date?
Would be interested to hear other opinions on this, and hopefully get answers to some of those questions
a) are these added automatically, if so what are the criteria and why do some of my work pages have it and others don't?
b) what is their function? If this is an arbitrary cataloguing system only used by IMSLP, then does this mean IMSLP then becomes the authority on said composers' cataloguing? If I were, say, to upload my works on another music score library, and they used their own INP numbering, then which one would be regarded as authentic / correct?
c) how is the numbering system judged? is the method transparent so anyone could clearly see a way of keeping adding these numbers manually? For example my piece model5 (INP 28) was composed 4 years after my piece Origami (INP 29), yet the latter is one number higher than the former. If it's not chronological, then what is the logic?
c) would it make sense to be applied to composers who are dead and whose output is therefore unlikely to be increased other than posthumously? does it make sense for composers (like myself) who keep adding works to my page, sometimes adding older works I had not uploaded earlier, therefore potentially "messing up" the numbering to date?
Would be interested to hear other opinions on this, and hopefully get answers to some of those questions
Re: I-Catalog Number
a) Originally the numbers only appear on pages that are in the "Composition" tab but not any other tab for that person (e.g. Collections). In your case it looks like the system excluded pieces where you were the performer as well, which is not intended. This has been fixed, the catalog will be updated by tomorrow to assign numbers to the rest of your pieces too.
b) IMSLP is the authority on I-Catalog numbers, but any composer is welcome to create his/her own catalog system (e.g. opus numbers).
c) To keep things simple the only promise is that the numbers are unique and stick with the page. The numbering is not intended to be chronological, rather, the initial assignment is ordered alphabetically. Sometimes this becomes chronological (e.g. Symphony No.1 through No.30 or something), but that's not the intention. Newly added pieces are assigned the next available number.
d) The intention of the I-Catalog system is as a fallback to uniquely identify pieces where there is no authoritative catalog system. It is not intended to be musicologically sophisticated or to replace a well-researched catalog.
Hope that makes things clearer
b) IMSLP is the authority on I-Catalog numbers, but any composer is welcome to create his/her own catalog system (e.g. opus numbers).
c) To keep things simple the only promise is that the numbers are unique and stick with the page. The numbering is not intended to be chronological, rather, the initial assignment is ordered alphabetically. Sometimes this becomes chronological (e.g. Symphony No.1 through No.30 or something), but that's not the intention. Newly added pieces are assigned the next available number.
d) The intention of the I-Catalog system is as a fallback to uniquely identify pieces where there is no authoritative catalog system. It is not intended to be musicologically sophisticated or to replace a well-researched catalog.
Hope that makes things clearer