Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > >Phil, you are the one who started this, for a second time now, in this > >thread. > > > No, you did, and a second time after I stopped, and you brought it back > up. > > I merely offered a recap of what to do to resolve any issues people may > have with an album not being displayed. i.e. fix tags so that it works > with Squeezebox Server, or change Squeezebox Server's "Various Artists" > setting, rather than sit around whinging that it's a bug that affects > millions of users and should be fixed without changing tags.
no, i gave a link to the bug report, where the workarounds, which i discovered and wrote about btw, (just like the bug itself), are. i didn't whine about anything. you however whined it should be called an enhancement instead of a bug, which is silly. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > > >1. your assessment isn't valid, b/c the data isn't "dodgy" > Yes it is, in respect of how this app works. then blame the app, not the data. this is the basis of our disagreement. we have a basic fundamental difference of opinion, which can beneatly summed up as: 1. i believe the app should should deal properly with common data sets, and not do what it currently does, which is hide music due to something very common "in the wild" and not even indicate its doing it. 2. imo, you believe a user should have to change either their tags, or the default category name SC uses, that they, the users, are "in the wrong" and that they therefore shold have to adjuct change, and SC shouldn't change to accommodate them. whats so stunning about this POV, is the total disregard for the notion that many, many users would NOT EVEN KNOW anything was wrong to begin with! but that doesn't matter to you apparently. luckily, i believe that logitech agrees with my approach to users and common data sets in the wild, and will design SC going forward, (at some point), to not force users to discover, and then workaround, this issue. rather it will be handled gracefully from the start, which it isn't now. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > > >2. no one at slim intended scanned albums to be hidden > No, probably not, but then again no-one expected various artist albums > to not be compilations. and this points to problems with the VA logic detection... thats another can of worms tho. suffice it to say my opinion is that SC should not decide something is, or is not, a comp based on if AA tags are there or not. but that issue really has nothing to do with this specific issue of conflict with a common string used by cddb/gracenote/amg. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > > >3. a string, regardless of what it is or what you think of it, > >shouldn't ultimately cause albums to be hidden, no matter what, > (unless > >thats the intention of the tag, which is not the case here). > > > Such a situation is indeterminate - it doesn't fit in with how the app > is trying to display albums by the chosen artist. > Various Artists - only shows compilation albums. > Any other artist - display albums by that artist that are not > compilations. > > An album that is by an artist/album-artist called Various Artists that > is not a compilation doesn't fit into either category, so it isn't > displayed. It's not hidden, just not displayed. i.e. Such albums are > visible in other ways (Browse albums, search, browse music folder). i understand all that, thats why i filed the bug. i also think that having it show in some places, and not in others, makes it even more difficult to discover for unsuspecting users. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > Potentially such albums could be listed in Various Artists, but they > aren't compilations, so it would be wrong. Like you say, the artist > name is just a string, so without a compilation indicator, it shouldn't > be displayed as a compilation. thus why i suggested being able to optionally turn off current VA detection, and/or use something like user defined strings. that would solve the issue. its really only slightly different than turning off VA detection and using comp=1 tags. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > Potentially such albums could be listed as another "Various Artists" > entry, but that's confusing, having two diffferent artists listed with > the same name. i'm not suggesting that, nor would i. frankly, i think the way slim uses "compilations" in some places, and "various artists"in others is annoying and not consistent/intuitive. but in any case, my solutions would not necessitate what you are suggesting but also not supporting. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > Potentially such albums could be listed in another special category, > (like albums without an album name appear in "No Album"), eg. "Various > Artists - Non Compilation". that would be silly, since they are comps in almost all cases, whether SC thinks so or not. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > All of these things are enhancement requests - changing the way the > software works to account for metadata that is not how the app was > intended to cope with. > > A better approach which I've mentioned somewhere else before, which is > also how other apps that support compilation albums does it, would be to > have a Browse Compilations browse menu, and Browse Artists would not > have the special "Various Artists" entry at the top. Then an artist > that is called "Various Artists" and is not a compilation could appear > without confusing compilations/non-compilations issues. > > I think that's a cleaner UI. That's an enhancement request though. i could possibly support something like that, (part of it anyway), but again its not what i'm suggesting. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > > >3. a string, regardless of what it is or what you think of it, > >shouldn't ultimately cause albums to be hidden, no matter what, > (unless > >thats the intention of the tag, which is not the case here). > > > Maybe I should also mention the diacritics in tags issue - where an > artist name string is not interpretted and displayed in the form it was > entered. The App is essentially hiding the artist string, as it is > merged within another artist record. They should be displayed as > distinct items, and leave it up to the user to correct tags, not make > some arbitrary judgement how the artists should be aggregated. don't see how thats related or why you'd want to talk about that in this thread, but it seems to me that the SQL DB isn't arbitrary about how to merge things when diacritics are ignored. SQL has its method of doing it. i'll add though that i fully support optionally respecting diacritics. Philip Meyer;449624 Wrote: > > >i see no reason for this issue to be contentious or argued over > True. good. -- MrSinatra www.lion-radio.org using: sb2 & sbc (my home) / sbr (parent's home) - w/sc 7.3.4b - win xp pro sp3 ie8 - 3.2ghz / 2gig ram - 1tb wd usb2 raid1 - 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=48072 _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/ripping
