Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion
Rejection of "ignore the" patch (split from the Evil_G unsupported build thread)
Llorean:
And why would someone only want to ignore articles in one language, but leave them in another, with multilingual tracks?
Is "The Who" "El Who" in Spanish, or still "The Who"? Meanwhile, "Los Pericos" (first band I could find starting with Los) should still be "Los Pericos" or should the Los no longer be ignored if the UI is in English? What about the song "Los Angeles", or should that name be used in the name of a band? Clearly that wouldn't be ignored.
Again, I don't see how this solution offers any amount of real flexibility.
Can you name some benefits other than "Users don't have to fix their tags" over the more general solution?
safetydan:
As Llorean as made clear, a system that automagically determines which articles to drop is unlikely to be comitted to Rockbox. It's also unlikely to ever work well enough to satisfy everyone. Sorting on special tags will work for everyone since it's pretty much infinitely customisable.
So can I be a pain and ask people to test http://www.rockbox.org/tracker/task/7287 which is a patch that adds support for the sorting tags in ID3, Vorbis/APE comments, and MP4 metadata? It should add three new tags to the tagnavi syntax, sortalbum, sorttitle, and sortartist.
I've had a request to support an albumartist sort tag but that might be a bit messier as there's no separate tag in ID3 for that.
alienbiker99:
i dont know if there is a way to do this, but setting up a system of checking which ones to ignore would work too
lalittle:
--- Quote from: Llorean on June 11, 2007, 05:48:08 PM ---And why would someone only want to ignore articles in one language, but leave them in another, with multilingual tracks?
Is "The Who" "El Who" in Spanish, or still "The Who"? Meanwhile, "Los Pericos" (first band I could find starting with Los) should still be "Los Pericos" or should the Los no longer be ignored if the UI is in English? What about the song "Los Angeles", or should that name be used in the name of a band? Clearly that wouldn't be ignored.
--- End quote ---
That's a valid point, but the short answer would be that I would have no problem with "Los Pericos" being listed under "L" rather than "P." To me, the logic behind the ignore approach is to ignore articles in the currently selected language, and let everything else sort as it may. I admit that the "ignore" approach will run into certain situations where the logic is not necessarily ideal to everybody, but I have found that in practice, the system works VERY effectively on devices like the iPod, as well as applications like iTunes, JR Media Center, and others. These use the "ignore" approach to sorting without articles, and to put it simply, it works fine in my opinion.
--- Quote ---Again, I don't see how this solution offers any amount of real flexibility.
--- End quote ---
I won't argue that the "tag" method can offer a lot more flexibility, but in my opinion it's not worth the cost (i.e. the extra work), which I believe is the reason that so few other applications or devices (no mainstream ones that I know of at this time) use the "ignore" approach. To put it simply, it's just easier for the user. Again, I understand that others don't necessarily agree with this -- I am only stating my opinion.
--- Quote ---Can you name some benefits other than "Users don't have to fix their tags" over the more general solution?
--- End quote ---
No -- that's the only reason for using the "ignore" approach to this issue that I can think of. To me, however, (and to other users like me who just don't want to have to deal with more tagging duties) this is a VERY important reason, and is a "deal breaker" for the "tag" approach. You can call it "laziness" if you want, but the simple truth is that I'm already over-capacity on this sort of thing, and given that the "ignore" approach is already proven to work for me in my personal use, I prefer the concept.
Please note that I am not trying to change anybody's mind here -- I'm simply having a discussion where I'm clarifying my thoughts on the issue for anyone that is interested.
Thanks,
Larry
lalittle:
--- Quote from: safetydan on June 11, 2007, 06:26:08 PM ---As Llorean as made clear, a system that automagically determines which articles to drop is unlikely to be comitted to Rockbox.
--- End quote ---
I understand this and fully accept the situation. This does not mean, however, that I won't continue to participate in discussions about the issue, or maintain hope that independent users will continue to develope a patch that uses the "ignore" approach for sorting. Just because it's not officially committed doesn't mean that individuals can't create and apply the patch (which is one of the nice things about Rockbox in general.)
--- Quote ---It's also unlikely to ever work well enough to satisfy everyone. Sorting on special tags will work for everyone since it's pretty much infinitely customisable.
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure why we keep coming back to this idea that the "tag" approach "will work for everybody." As I've stated, it simply does not work for me because I'm not willing to go through the extra effort of editing tags for this purpose. Again, you can call this laziness, but to me, it's more important to have it "automatic" (requiring NO user intervention) than it is to have it more "customizable." I honestly don't NEED the extra customizing power of the "tag" approach, so the "ignore" approach, to me, is a the better option. That's my opinion -- it's not "right" or "wrong," it's just my opinion. Just because you don't agree with this does not invalidate the opinion.
On a side note, I'm clearly not the only one who feels this way, as evidenced by the use of the "ignore" approach in so many other devices and applications. I'm not claiming that this proves it's the "correct" way to do this -- I'm simply pointing out that I'm not alone in my opinions here.
Thanks again for the discussion on this,
Larry
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version