Talk:International Standard Musical Work Code

Uptake

It would be good to show evidence of this being used by public-facing web sites, such as a library or retailer. Andy Mabbett 16:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Clarifications

It would be useful to clarify the phrase "is a unique identifier for musical works".

For example: Consider the following ISWCs...

• T-071.314.125-3
• T-802.203.417-0
• T-802.192.136-9
• T-802.337.911-6
• T-801.864.699-7
• T-801.952.979-5
• T-801.981.666-2
• T-801.983.126-7
• T-801.983.736-7
• T-802.222.486-9
• T-802.254.649-3
• T-802.298.235-1
• T-802.602.941-5
• T-802.876.769-4
• T-803.034.055-8
• T-803.062.597-0
• T-803.069.454-4
• T-803.088.674-0
• T-803.088.860-0
• T-801.983.578-1

ALL of these are for (what appears to be) the same piece of music: "Mack the Knife". All of them are listed as having been performed by Michael Bublé. In other words, we have one work that is listed under a plethora of different codes.

Source: http://iswcnet.cisac.org/

WhitePJ (talk) 21:57, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

They all uniquely identify the same work. They don't identify any other works. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Hence the need for clarification. The phrase "ISWC is a unique identifier for musical works" implies a 1:1 cardinality, which appears to be an invalid statement in this case. the DVLA will issue a unique identifier for each motorist - where the identifier is uniquely associated with a single driver. No m:n connectivity occurs.

From the publications of the ISO TC46/SC9 secretariat: "Each ISWC is a unique number which is permanently assigned to a [single] musical work" (emphasis mine).

Furthermore, there are phrases used such as "a certified identification key", and advocating the use of a "preferred ISWC" if there are duplicate codes . An example supporting this behavious would be T-070.891.356-7, which will also show a secondary ISWC of T-070.981.582-6. Only one entry is returned, for both numbers.

Hence there is an inference that the ISWC serves as a primary key. If this is indeed the intention, then clarification should be made within the wikipedia article, stating that it does not (yet) occur in practice - or to otherwise clarify what constitutes an individual work within the eyes of the ISWC committee.

WhitePJ (talk) 22:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International Standard Musical Work Code. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051218164350/http://www.collectionscanada.ca/iso/tc46sc9/15707.htm to http://www.collectionscanada.ca/iso/tc46sc9/15707.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)