IMSLP Forums

I have added a composition called "Four Pieces for Natural Horn" to the composer page for Robert G. Patterson. I notice that it is sorted under "P" on the composer page but under "F" in other category pages. I would prefer that it always sort under "F". Is there some way to control this?

Yes, change the title to "4 Pieces . . ." that way the numeral won't count.

Thank you for your reply steltz. It had crossed my mind to do as you suggest, but I really prefer that it be sorted universally under "F" and I was wondering if there is perhaps a template or other means to force it there.

Our format is to use numerals, but maybe someone who knows more about templates can answer this. I think it may have come up before . . .

Steltz is correct. IMSLP has to have rules about the formatting of page titles just so that they appear consistently in alphabetical lists and searches, just as all library catalogues have to do. So "4 Pieces..." will avoid your composition being misplaced or overlooked.

I totally get that by starting with a numeral you get consistent placement. But aesthetically sometimes a number is part of the title. For example if someone were to set Adam Bertocci's "Two Gentlemen of Lebowski" to music, one would hardly want it to be filed under "G"!

Yes, absolutely, our rule allows those sort of exceptions

So how does one achieve this?

rpatters1 wrote:So how does one achieve this?

Do you have a specific instance in mind?

My goal is to have my piece "Four Pieces for Natural Horn" filed under "F" rather than "P". I know I can change "Four" to "4" and the IMSLP site and many catalogers will be very happy. For some reason, however, as the composer I feel a strong attachment to the "Four" exactly the way I spelled it and in the "F" slot. So I am resisting the cataloging of this piece under "P", at least until it is proven that resistance is futile.

Right now, however, with "Four" I get the placement under "F" that I want in some categories but not others. I have found some other pieces on the site that start with "Four" yet consistently get filed under "F" and others that start with "Four" and get filed under the second word in the title in the lists where the magic happens. I am hoping there is a way to control the magic, but I haven't found it. Hence, I asked the assembled wisdom on this forum.

Compare viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5467&hilit=fine+vivian

If resistance is futile, resistance is futile, BUT...

A) How does the site know that (for example) Vivian Fine's "Four Elizabethan Songs" starts with "F" and not "E"? How would it know that "Two Gentlemen of Lebowski" starts with "T" and not "G"? Is it looking for magic keywords in the second position? If so, what are they?

B) The site is in fact inconsistent in the lists for my title "Four Pieces for Natural Horn", and at least I can take some pleasure in seeing it appear where I think it ought to in those lists. (Until a bug is fixed somewhere, I guess. )

C) I find it interesting that in two cases where we are dealing with the living composer or her direct descendant, neither was very happy with this standard of cataloging. As more living composers come on board, which I would be amazed if they don't, it will be interesting to see how often this issue comes up again.

In any standard library catalogue your work would appear as "Pieces, natural horn (4)", so IMSLP's "4 Pieces for Natural Horn" is probably an improvement from your point of view Please bear in mind too that our users are multi-national and don't necessarily know that "Four" is the same as the number 4, or that "Twelve" is 12, etc. Our rules have evolved over time, and while not everyone might be happy with the method (which I hope is what you meant, rather than the "standard") of our cataloguing, we have one method and need to stick with it.

The problems that arise when we don't are illustrated by the examples you give, where someone with the best of intentions attempted to make titles starting with "Three" sort as if they began with "3" (for example) in certain situations, with the confusing results you describe above. Like traffic rules, we need to adhere to certain basic works that keep the system flowing, which sometimes means putting our personal preferences aside

Davydov wrote:Please bear in mind too that our users are multi-national and don't necessarily know that "Four" is the same as the number 4, or that "Twelve" is 12, etc.

All the more reason to catalog it under "F" or "T" in my view. But I am not resisting any more.

I now know why up to now I have occasionally had so much trouble browsing down to other pieces on this site. I was looking under the first letter of the title. Silly me! This is where Google is such a help.

Fortunately the name of the popular song "Tea for two and two for tea" is not "Two for tea and tea for two". Otherwise it will be sorted under f.