Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion

Rejection of "ignore the" patch (split from the Evil_G unsupported build thread)

<< < (10/23) > >>

lalittle:

--- Quote from: GodEater on May 25, 2007, 03:03:02 AM ---@lalittle -> I'd also say, to be blunt, looking through this thread, that you've not gathered hordes of support for your "solution" - you do seem to be the only person arguing for it.

--- End quote ---

I can't argue with that (although I'm technically not the "only" person on my side in this thread.)  Then again, only a handful of people have posted in this thread at ALL, so I don't think any conclusions can be drawn one way or another.  We just don't have a large enough cross section of opinions posted.

I may in fact be in the minority on this one -- I'm merely pointing out that this "may" not be the case, and I did this in response to the idea that one method would be more conducive to a larger group of people.

Larry

nls:
I never use the database but personally I would not use the ignore article in it's less flexible incarnation, for example I have swedish artists starting with "the" that I would not want sorted withouht article but would like most of the american artist starting with "the" to be sorted without the article, also I would not like some of my artists with swedish names to be sorted without articles. IOW if this kind of flexibility was impossible I wouldn't use it at all.

That means that I agree with Lloreans suggestion using the sort order tags.
Another good point with this approach is that it would not require any additional options to turn it on or off, just sort by sort order tag if present, else sort by display tag.

Rincewind:
I want to add another point why only stripping certain articles from the sorting isn't enough.

With Jazz artists, it is a common sorting scheme to sort them by the last name.

e.g.

--- Code: ---John Coltrane
Miles Davis
Jan Garbarek
Keith Jarett
--- End code ---
This is the order they appear in a (my favorite) music store.

I would really like to have support for more tags in the database. It would be very nice to have a tagnavi.config where you can define (=use) all the tags you want to display, even custom ones. The tag scanner then uses this information to scan the additional tags that are defined (for whatever purposes). A common set of tags (used in the wps) should always be scanned, if they are in the config or not.

Advantages:
- every tag tag that someone possibly want to use in the tagnavi.config is available
- no database space is wasted, people who don't want fancy tags leave them out of their tagnavi.config and then they aren't scanned.
- no special cases need to be coded for album/track artist, sort fields, cd numbers etc. The tagnavi.config defines the use of special tags (some more syntax might be needed there).
Disatvantages:
- if the  tagnavi.config is changed, the database needs to be rebuilt.
- the structure of the database would be a little bit dynamic
- a host-based database builder needs access to the tagnavi.config

what do you think, is this worth a proper feature request?

alienbiker99:
if anybody is interested, norbusan edited this patch to support three other leading "the" in other languages. If somebody could edit the patch so that it can support ignoring two and one letter leading words, we could have it also ignore "a" and any other leading words such as "el" or "la"

lalittle:

--- Quote from: alienbiker99 on June 11, 2007, 12:24:51 AM ---if anybody is interested, norbusan edited this patch to support three other leading "the" in other languages. If somebody could edit the patch so that it can support ignoring two and one letter leading words, we could have it also ignore "a" and any other leading words such as "el" or "la"

--- End quote ---

Thanks for the information.

As far as I know, the articles that are traditionally ignored in sort lists are "a," "an," and "the."  If these three words could be ignored in each of the languages that Rockbox supports, it would essentially take care of this specific issue.  It would of course not address things like "last name first" sorting, but I'm actually used to this at this point, so an "ignore" function would take care of everything I'd personally need, and it would not require any re-tagging, which is an important issue in my opinion.

Thanks,

Larry

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page