Support and General Use > User Interface and Voice
bands that start with "the"
saab_rider:
thanks..
That's why I asked for an update.
Mr. Brownstone:
Only a small change was necessary.
I made a new patch:
[attachment deleted by admin, too old]
saab_rider:
Thanks Mr. Brownstone!
Wish I undestand the code :)
CatBus:
This seems to be as good a place as any to ask this question. First, some background: I am one of those people who has tagged all of their music "Artistname, The" and "Lastname, Firstname" so that it sorts correctly. And to answer everyone's perennial question, "The The" is tagged "The, The"--simple, logical, and consistent.
The problem of Artist "Display" Name vs. Artist "Organizational" Name seems to be a fundamental problem with existing music file tagging conventions. Has there ever been any discussion anywhere that music files should use one tag for display and another tag entirely for organization?
I mean, software can do some clever things and figure out that leading "The" (and incidentally "A" and "An", which are much less frequently used) should be ignored for organizational purposes. But you're still stuck with Bob Dylan getting misfiled under "B" for most people. And any attempts by software to automate Lastname sorting would misfile Jethro Tull under "T", have difficulty with multi-word last names, etc.
To me, the simple answer is: have one tag called "Artist" (the current tag). This is the display name. Then create a new tag called "File Under" (or something). This is used for sorting. If the "File Under" tag is empty, fall back to "Artist" for organizing.
Tadaa! We now have a system that's backwards-compatible with existing music files, makes most people happy by not displaying the "ugly" name with commas, and makes people like me happy by sorting correctly. You could even tweak the "File Under" tag to make multi-artist collaborations get filed under the artist of your choice, etc.
Why on Earth isn't this how things are done already? Has this discussion never happened before? Anyone? My only guess is: nobody cares enough to go through the effort. Which is a shame because it doesn't really seem like a lot of work.
PLEASE NOTE: I am not sugesting that Rockbox add support for a unique tagging system that nobody else uses. I'm simply wondering why nobody uses it.
saab_rider:
If you ask me ID3 tags aren't used to their fullest potential at all.
Even though we have track numbers within ID3 tags, we still resort to adding the track number in the file name to be able to have an album in the correct order rather than have the tracks sorted out alphabeticaly.
Another problematic issue is having a "feat. artist". For example, having the artist as "50 Cent feat. Eminem" (it's the only thing I could think of right now) would cause problems when using a data base. This causes having two entries; "50 cent" and "50 cent feat. Eminem". Soloution? add the featured artist at the end of the title. But then that looks ugly, and doesn't look like it should.
Why not have a feat. ID3 tag?
But forget about tags that don't exist. So many tags already exist, and very very few programs/ hardware (eg DAPs) make use of the existing tags. Rockbox makes it possible to view what ever tag you need.
Anyway, back to your problem. I suggest you keep the "artist" name in the ID3 normal (eg Bob Dylan), but have the file name as "Dylan, Bob".
When you browse, it's sorted the way you want, and in the WPS, you don't get the commas, and doesn't look like you're looking at the yellow pages.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version