Template talk:Pub

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Categorizing by year

I was a little startled to see Dido and Aeneas, Z 626 (Henry Purcell) in Category:1925 works since the work page has "3" for the first parameter. Shall we simply delete the word "first" from the category pages, or do we want a bunch of [[Category:Reprinted [for the N time?] YYYY works]] pages? Richard Mix (talk) 00:55, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying. I would propose to remove the word "first" (in Template:{{CatTxt}}). I thought about changing Template:{{Pub}} so only the first publication would be assigned to a category, but there are quite a few work pages where we don't know date of first publication, just a later one. Also, I think it is more useful to have all publication dates in a category, especially in your case where the 1925 publication is an arrangement. Good point about reprints, but sometimes it's useful to know where to find it in a recent (or more widely known) publication. Personally I'd rather let editors decide whether the reprint or copy is important enough to cite on the work page. — Barry Johnston (talk) 04:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Agreed, and simpler to do than I had thought!
In fact, it looks like the Z 626 harpsichord realization might have just entered PD-US. Richard Mix (talk) 21:24, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Visibility

"no=10-11" doesn't sort correctly in MultiPubList so for Ego autem constitui regem meum (Adam Gumpelzhaimer) I followed the example of Gloria in excelsis Deo - Qui tollis (Adam Gumpelzhaimer). When commented out, however, entry 11 disappears from Sacrorum_concentuum_(Adam_Gumpelzhaimer)#Liber_2, and I'm not sure if there's a workaround. Ideally of course no=10|no=11 would fit in the same template and display as "1614 in Sacrorum concentuum, Liber 2, nos. 10 & 11" on the work page. Richard Mix (talk) 03:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

More numbering parameters?

I've given myself a headache wondering whether the 1569 and 1579 prints of Liber primus motettorum (Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina) somehow were different, and hadn't expected that numbering might depend on the edition. Should Template:Pub have more parameters like no2= & per[icope]= ? (I guess the 1st can be covered by Pub|2)

Choralis Constantinus (Heinrich Isaac) is a special case. Choralis constantinus I is unnumbered in the 1550 print, but the 1555 volumes both go by pericopes, so: vol 1 no 1, 2, 3, or i.1.1, i.1.2, i.1.3 … or 1Int[roit], 1Gr, 1Sequ? Richard Mix (talk) 00:26, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

0 for parameter 1?

The documentation breaks off and things seem to be under construction here: should I leave Protector noster, MH 501 (Johann Michael Haydn) with {{Pub|0|1789|}} as is for now? Richard Mix (talk) 22:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Barry has shown me "0" can work with additional syntax (see User_talk:BarryJ#template:Pub) but I wonder if it wouldn't have been simpler to replace "zero" with one of "comp" or "ms". It's been pointed out that the text "First published" with 1st parameter 1 assumes the editor has researched all appearances in print and isn't necessarily true: I'm pretty sure The Church Anthem Book isn't literally the 5th publication of O quam gloriosum est regnum (Tomás Luis de Victoria). What if that parameter were optional, and the syntax were {{Pub|date1|title1+description|date2 … with dates in chronological order, within a single template? Richard Mix (talk) 02:01, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Richard. I will change the documentation. The problem is that {{Pub}} was designed in tandem with {{MultiPubList}}, with a fairly complex relationship between them. The way it is designed now doesn't show all the publications in many cases, but it actually does in many others. I think it is useful, though – it shows the nth publication at CPDL; which is a stimulus (to me, at least) to find out what the first publication really was. I will investigate the possibility of making a dummy parameter (like maybe 99? or X?) which would not give a number ; don't hold your breath.
Re One template. I can't imagine how this would work, which means about 6 months of complete redesign of MultiPubList. Interesting idea, though. — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Another bug: Liber primus (Cristoforo Montemayor) lists items 1-6, but when I looked at 7 I had a feeling I'd seen Ave maris stella (Cristoforo Montemayor) before, on the composer page. Richard Mix (talk) 19:13, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
I changed '1593' to '1592' to make item 7 to appear on publication page. Claude (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
I see you fixed one of them. This is not a bug, but the editor(s) didn't get the List of works right, nor sequence or date right on the work pages. I corrected it as far as I have time. — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Claude, I didn't consider other possibilities! This means one has to make a firm choice for cases like Le nuove musiche (Giulio Caccini), either MDCI or 1602 depending on which calendar one goes by. Richard Mix (talk) 08:34, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
And there's nothing wrong with doing something like {{PubDatePlace|1601|- 1602 in Firenze, appresso i Marescotti| }}, or adding a note about dating to the second parameter (or to Descr) – as long as all the work pages have 1601 in the Pub template (or whatever year the editor decides should go in the first parameter). — Barry Johnston (talk) 20:13, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
If everything depends on the date parameter instead of just the link to the publication page, it might be worth putting a warning in documentation, lest someone independently puts {{PubDatePlace|1602| the MDCI on title page reckons New Year from the Annunciation| }} But how do publication pages handle reprints/multiple volumes? Can Nuove musiche have both dates?Richard Mix (talk) 02:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
MultiPubList searches all linked work pages for a line that contains Pub-Year, Pub-PageTitle, and Pub-Composer. If "seq" is specified, it looks for the "no=" parameter on the same line; if "pg" is specified, it looks for "pg=". If "yr" is specified, it looks for the "Pub|1|… " line. If there are multiple volumes (or editions, or parts), i.e., the Volumes template is used, it also looks for "vol=<name> <vno>". (It's actually much more complex than this, simplified for this discussion.)
You asked, "[H]ow do publication pages handle reprints/multiple volumes?" Reprints are usually just listed in the PubDatePlace 2nd parameter or in the Description, as in Patterson's Church Music (Robert Patterson). An editor has a choice whether to use the {{Volumes}} template to separate different volumes (or hefte, editions, parts, etc.) on the publication page. Using the Volumes template is a little complex, so I have left it up to an individual editor whether they want to try it themselves (several have) or I will do it for them. I would recommend {{Volumes}} for separate editions; for different volumes, some editors have chosen instead to separate the volumes on different pages; and in simple cases a few volumes or editions can be handled on one publication page without any special treatment. At the moment, there are 64 publication pages using the Volumes template, the more spectacular examples being Bach-Gesellschaft Ausgabe and Neue Schütz-Ausgabe. And you probably know about Florilegium Portense.
You ask, "Can Nuove musiche have both dates?" It could, I suppose, but I think editors have usually chosen to standardize around the current system of dating. If you think it was published between Jan 1 and Dec 31, 1602, then it should be listed as 1602 with a note somewhere that "the title page says MDCI, according to the Italian system of counting years from the Annunciation". (Or similarly if you think 1601.) Perhaps this deserves a page of its own, considering other complications of dating (see Wikipedia article)? — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:47, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
It would have been lucky if inclusion on the publication page didn't depend on the year, but you've given me an appreciation for how complicated things are underneath the hood! Richard Mix (talk) 18:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

'Nth published' again

The template doesn't accept "?" as a parameter and I'm still not sure what the best work-around might be for unknown order of publication, but what do you think of my stopgap at Jesu, dulcis memoria (Tomás Luis de Victoria) with commented out <!--'3rd', '6th' & '9th' are all guesses"? Richard Mix (talk) 20:17, 13 September 2021 (UTC)