JimC;290203 Wrote: > First, respecting the Txxx user defined tag IS NOT the same as mapping > an existing tag to a different use. That tag is mapped directly to its > intended use; it is not redefined to mean something else internally. > The TPE2 tag is also used exactly as it was intended--to display the > band information when appropriate (see Snarly's example for how that > works).
i understand that, i agree. the point i was making is that Txxx tags are a defacto standard, but not a true standard. yet, SC7 still respects it. likewise, other software uses TPE2 as album artist. this is indeed not a true standard. but it is a defacto standard. i think SC7 should respect it. PLEASE KEEP THIS IN MIND: mp3 users have no way, NONE, to get their CDs to sort properly in SC7 using only standard tags! i think thats a huge part of this, one that can't simply be ignored. that means unless a user uses a Txxx type tag, it will be impossible for them to get an album sorted properly that may or may not be a VA album. if it offends your sensibilities to have an option to map TPE2 to both BAND and ALBUMARTIST, then allow a user an option to sort by BAND tag, (which is already populated by the TPE2 field). JimC;290203 Wrote: > Have you suggested to the good folks at Apple that *their* > implementation of ID3 tags is not correct? How about ID3.org--have you > tried discussing with them the fact they didn't do a very good job of > defining useful tags for anything other than a standard, > non-compilation album? Seriously. Do you think they even care that > they've made this mess? why are you trying to fight the tide? i'm not some lone nut. there are lots of people in this boat thru no fault of their own, people who you have sold to or want to sell to. is your reaction to them (assuming they even bother to complain if they don't like the results after DL), going to be "blame apple and blame id3? go get another program, learn it and retag your stuff with non-standard tags?" i know this isn't slims fault, i never said or meant to imply it is. all i am suggesting is it is to slims benefit to allow mp3 users to sort by TPE2 if they want, (and as many programs have made them expect will be the case). (i don't mean to say exactly how slim should accomplish this, just that it should be a goal) i mean, whats more important, SC7 and slim martyring themselves for a point that is true but nonetheless unchangeable, OR making the product flexible to account for an erroneous but widespread defacto standard? JimC;290203 Wrote: > The mantra that SqueezeCenter should conform to some other application's > broken (i.e., not conforming to standards) implementation is getting a > bit strident. We may decide to do that, but I don't find the argument > that "itunes does it so you should too" to be very compelling. Nor do > I think this problem is a significant inhibitor to our success at this > point. well, you conform to using Txxx tags that have a defacto standard. and thats a smaller overall population. did slim always conform to using Txxx tags? i'm asking that seriously, b/c i don't know. i agree its broken usage. but it is what it is. like i said, slim offers mp3 users NO WAY to sort their albums using only standard id3 tags. should that not be a goal, especially since a defacto standard using TPE2 exists in many apps? and no doubt slim is successful. but there is always room to improve. JimC;290203 Wrote: > But rest assured I get the message that you want what you perceive as > the "majority" of MP3 files supported the way you think is correct. > You may stop flogging that horse now; it's long past deceased. i do NOT think its "correct." i agree its wrong. but it IS the reality. it is the defacto standard. how am i supposed to sort using only standard tags? that option is what i want. if i can denote by it, i should be able to sort by it. i'm not trying to exasperate you, just make my case. i'm sorry if how i do it bothers you. JimC;290203 Wrote: > We're looking at what would make sense, given our current user base, our > target audience, our product requirements, and our resources. Once I > have all the information we need, we'll put together a proposal and > gather feedback on it. I'll make sure we get you involved in that > process as I'd like to see if we can reasonably accommodate your > request without creating an overly-complex user experience or breaking > things for other users. > > -=> Jim i absolutely don't want to change current functionality, or make other people have to switch up their existing info to fix this. i merely want to ADD to the functionality, via a single option. i guess ultimately i am confused why you would have a user like me have the option to DENOTE my TPE2 / BAND info, but not sort by it... what good is it for me to have things sort out of place? why is the first possible, but not the second? TPE2 is already in SC7 as BAND. is it an app killer to add an option to then sort by BAND? i hope you understand i only mean to argue for my point, not antagonize you or anything else negative. once again, please see my proposal i did per your suggestion: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=290178#post290178 -- MrSinatra www.LION-Radio.org Using: Squeezebox2 (primary) / SBR (secondary) / Jive - w/SC 7.0.1beta - Win XP Pro SP2 - 3.2ghz / 2gig ram - D-Link DIR-655 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46093 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
