[uf-new] hAudio: relevant UIDs

[Andy Mabbett]

In message <82AB359C-3201-4420-92F0-4FD8FABF2036 at makedatamakesense.com>,
Scott Reynen <scott at makedatamakesense.com> writes

>http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=elgar
>
>That has 6,120,000 results.
>
>> <http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=elgar+ISRC>
>
>That has 27,500 results.
>
>>         <http://www.google.co.uk/search&q=beethoven+ISWC>
>
>That has 13,400 results.
>
>http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=beethoven
>
>That has 24,400,000 results.
>
>This cursory skim of real world publishing suggests to me that these
>ISO standards account for a very small portion (less than 1%) of our
>problem set.

You're using a bogus comparison, calculating "the proportion of sites
mentioning Elgar/ Beethoven which use ISO codes", instead of "the
proportion of sites publishing downloadable Elgar/ Beethoven audio (or
whatever) which use ISO codes".

>  If anyone is interested, obviously a more detailed  analysis would
>provide more accurate information, but I don't  personally see much
>cause for interest.
>
>> Besides, they're *ISO* international standards.
>
>That doesn't mean people are actually using them.

ISO don't write standards to keep themselves busy. Of course people are
using them.

How much of our "evidence" is obtained from b2b sites? How many people
with professional experience of music retailing, licensing or related
fields have contributed to the discussion? How much effort was made to
contact such people, in the fora they're likely to be using as part of
their work?


And are Google results acceptable as "evidence of lack of use", if
they're not allowed - by the "process" - as "evidence of use" ?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
            *  Say "NO!" to compulsory UK ID Cards:  <http://www.no2id.net/>
            *  Free Our Data:  <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>
            *  Are you using Microformats, yet: <http://microformats.org/> ?