Wikidata:Property proposal/music for work

music created for edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

Descriptiona work, event, etc. for which a musical composition was created (e.g., a play for which incidental music was composed; a ballet for which ballet music was written; a film for which motion picture music was created)
Representsmusical work (Q2188189)
Data typeItem
Domainitem; musical work (Q2188189)
Example 1Wild Swans (Q106877213) is music created for Wild Swans (Q8000817)
Example 2Frozen – Original Motion Picture Soundtrack (Q15530976) is music created for Frozen (Q246283)
Example 3Hamlet (Q50872559) is music created for Hamlet (Q41567)
Example 4The Mayor of Casterbridge (Q106878736) is music created for The Mayor of Casterbridge (Q106878615)
Example 5The Rite of Spring (Q206015) is music created for The Rite of Spring (Q106878397)
Example 6Peer Gynt (Q14912776) is music created for Peer Gynt (Q208094)
Example 7A Midsummer Night's Dream (Q42192954) is music created for A Midsummer Night's Dream (Q104871)
Example 8Theme from Star Trek (Q11590797) is music created for Star Trek: The Original Series (Q1077)
Example 9Coronation March (Q47008151) is music created for coronation of Elizabeth II (Q3797766)
Planned useLinking items for musical works to items for works that they were composed for
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See alsobroader proposal for "created for"

Aliases: music composed for; music for work; music for; composed for; composed for work

Motivation edit

There is currently no good way to link an item for a musical work to an item for a related work for which the music was composed. This property could be used to link musical compositions to choreographic works, plays, films, television programs, radio programs, video games, etc. In FRBR and IFLA LRM these are different works that are related to each other. RDA (Resource Description & Access) has several properties for this: is music for work, is incidental music for work, is music for motion picture work, is music for radio program work, is music for television program work, and is music for video work. Only the generic property is needed in Wikidata, since the items for individual works will have statements about what creative form or genre they are. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 00:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

  •   Support This will be a useful property, especially for ingesting metadata created by libraries into Wikidata. --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 01:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Pteropotamus (talk) 09:34, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Dominique Bourassa, Yale University Library, 11:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --cstrickler (talk) 11:29, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --User:bibliotecaria9 (talk) 12:17, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Emwille (talk) 12:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Utl jung (talk) 13:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Jala360 13:35, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support--Sandrileine (talk) 14:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support--As someone who has been putting musical compositions into Wikidata, this property would be quite useful. Cholden86, 18:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Helianthus74 19:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment the proposed label doesn't really match the way Wikidata properties usually work - I note that in the examples the proposer added the verb "is" (i.e. "is music for work" rather than just "music for work"). Normally a property label (in English at least) is mainly about the object, not the subject item; "music for work" seems at best ambiguous. Maybe "composed for" or "created for" would be more suitable? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment ArthurPSmith I went with the name of the property that librarians would be most familiar with, but I am not opposed to revising it to "composed for" if community consensus agrees with the change. "composed for" could still be ambiguous, since one might think the object value could then be a person or organization rather than another work. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 01:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose What about a musical work made for an event, such as a famous inauguration, a parade, a famous wedding, etc? So perhaps we could make this a bit broader in scope? The broadest would be a "Thing made/created for a Thing". In that case it would be "created for" but that's a close cousin to the already existing used by (P1535) which I think this proposal mimics but tries to constraint to a more narrower "Work made for a Work". If that's the real need, to have a more constraining used by (P1535), then I think this needs further discussion as to why used by (P1535) could not be used. We might also think of "made or created for a purpose", but that was discussed in the creation of has use (P366). But oftentimes the "use" of something is not necessarily why it was "created" in the first place. uses (P2283) could also be used in the reverse. Then we have further "usage" contained in state of use (P5817) As you can see, oftentimes properties that are all similar under the covers are often just "properties that have been constrained to a class or domains" that could be unconstrained a bit and tweaked to be generic properties useful across many domains. So, let's discuss more before we jump quickly ahead here. And also discuss the querying capabilities or needs, for example, are we looking to have easier querying of something like "? created for ?" --Thadguidry (talk) 16:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can see why you are suggesting that used by (P1535) might be an existing property to cover this, but it seems a bit awkward to say that a choreographic work such as a ballet uses a particular piece of music or the reverse that a piece of music is used by a ballet. It's not completely wrong, but to me it doesn't seem exactly right either. I'd be interested to hear what music catalogers think. There is also the property commissioned by (P88) to indicate that a work was commissioned by an organization or person, but that is not always the same thing as saying something was "commissioned for" another thing. Musical works are often commissioned by one thing for another thing. For example I recently saw the statement that a work was commissioned by the Adelaide Music Festival for the Adelaide Symphony Orchestra. These are two separate relationships. This proposal is identical to a specific relationship found in our cataloging rules (RDA, Resource Description and Access (Q1519318)) that is used to record the relationship of a musical work to another work and it was the intention here to reproduce this specific relationship in Wikidata. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 18:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Adam, do we agree that "commissioned for" is sorta "purpose" driven? I.E. some Thing was created for the purpose of use for another Thing? Take a step back and see that "for" in the "music for work" is really saying what? "created for"? If you agree that there's an underlying tone there to "created for a purpose" here during the creation process, then "created for" seems to cover a lot more use cases for Wikidata. I've been trying to get you to think more about broader usage in designing and improving Wikidata's ontology for the world (not only for Libraries). We want to try to encapsulate more cross-domain usage when we can, which means trying to design with easier and fewer constraints! Ya know, those things we sorta hate to deal with sometimes and get in the way too often? :-) But we often design bottom up with immediate use cases, and when patterns emerge after a few years, we might want to further design a broader property to cover many more things. So, I'd suggest rephrasing this proposal then to "created for". But if you really really want to keep a property around whose constraints are always for a "musical work", then we can keep this proposal as-is and further suggest a new proposal for "created for" to handle many more cases. What do you want to do? Rephrase this to "created for"? or make 2 proposals, this one "music for work" for constraints around "musical work" and another for "created for" to handle more broadly? --Thadguidry (talk) 19:02, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong support Oh please yes! This area is so messy at the moment, modelling all over the place. Moebeus (talk) 00:13, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support -- Fernsebner (talk) 16:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • All of you who have indicated   Support or   Strong support: do you support changing this proposal to be more general as "created for" or do you prefer the alternative to make two proposals, this one for "music for work" (or "composed for work") and a more broad one for "created for"? (See Thadguidry's comments above). UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 23:31, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Conditional support I think this must be broaded to "created for". --Tinker Bell 20:46, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support. To answer UWashPrincipalCataloger's question: a specific music-related one and a more general would be useful imo. -Yupik (talk) 01:07, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have made some modifications of this proposal, which will remain a property to connect an item for a musical composition to another item for a work, event, etc. for which the musical work was composed. In addition, I have created a broader property proposal for "created for", which could be used for relationships of non-musical works to other works, events, etc. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 03:41, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose now that we have a more general created for (P9883) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 05:28, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@UWashPrincipalCataloger, Clements.UWLib, Pteropotamus, Bourassad1, Kiwigirl3850, bibliotecaria9: @Emwille, Utl jung, Jala360, Sandrileine, Cholden86: @Helianthus74, ArthurPSmith, Thadguidry, Moebeus, Fernsebner, Tinker Bell: @Yupik, Vojtěch Dostál:   Done music created for (P9899) Lectrician1 (talk) 00:31, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lectrician1 It doesn't make sense. A more general property was just created. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 06:24, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Vojtěch Dostál Yes, and I also created that more-general property. This subproperty had a 16/18 support and a practical use case. This was dedicated to music items associated with another work, which is an extremely common occurrence on Wikidata and is deserving of its own subproperty. Having it's own subproperty also usefully allows music-work specific constraints. I created this with purpose and thought. Lectrician1 (talk) 10:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]