[Pdweb] Tracks as Topics

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Saturday, Jul 19, 2003, at 04:03 America/New_York, Frank Barknecht 
wrote:

> Hallo,
> Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>
>> Ah yes, sub-topics, that seems to work very well.  Like this:
>>
>> Community
>>     	Art (keywords "music", "video", "interactive", "performance",
>> "art")
>> 		Sound/Music (keywords "track" or whatever)
>> 		Video (keywords "video")
>> 		Interactive (keywords "interactive")
>> 		Performance (keywords "performance")
>>
>>
>> I just threw in Performance for the hell of it.  But I am trying to
>> resist creating a keyword explosion.
>
> Maybe we don't need subtopics here: The main overview page could just
> stay a 'static' page with links to the Topic-subfolders with the
> pieces.
>
> We're just one level deep and I don't see the need to dig deeper.
> Well, maybe later.
>
> The Keyword doesn't necessarily have to be visible on the Topic. So if
> someone doesn't like his music to be labeled "track", he shouldn't
> have to care because we could just change the Topic's name (currently
> "Tracks with Pd" to reflect our consensus. But the Keyword could still
> stay "Track".
>
> I don't think, that "music" is a good keyword for a track or a piece.
> A "piece" also could be a patch or a graphic. Maybe we could call it
> "musicfile"?
>
> We also could use more verbose Keywords like: "Community:Music" (I
> think, this works, iem.at seems to be down currently, so it's
> untested, at least "Community_Music" should work) This way, we would
> have the general words like "music" or "track" free for other uses.
> \

The "Community_music" thing seems to work well.  It makes it explicit 
where that file is going to show up.

We could break it down by sound/video/interactive.  That seems to cover 
everything pd pretty well.  But sound might be to vague.  There is no 
easy answer....

.hc