[mb-users] playlists and picard designs
Oliver Charles
oliver.g.charles at googlemail.com
Fri Jan 11 15:43:53 UTC 2008
The interface currently used in what we are sticking with (2 panes,
incoming on the left, tagged on the right) - as far as I know. The
single pane interface was originally used in Picard 0.7 and required a
huge amount of scrolling moving files around, as well as confusing a lot
of people knew to MusicBrainz.
Not quite sure what you mean colour to represent state, Picard does do
that at the moment (red represeting very large changes in metadata).
- Ollie
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 09:53 -0500, Will Holcomb wrote:
> Ok, so album ordering is maintained in the id3 tags. I use amarok the
> bulk of the time and it can generally does a pretty good job of
> managing metadata.
>
> I was wondering about the development path for Picard. I noticed a
> couple different interface designs listed on:
>
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/IntuitivePicardInterface
>
> Before opening my mouth with comments, I wanted to have an idea of how
> fixed this interface is. I searched for IRC logs of the discussion
> where the decision was made and found discussion, but nothing that
> seemed particularly in-depth. I'm curious about the reasoning behind
> not going with the single pane interface. I generally think of dual
> panes as allowing you to see either different views of the same thing
> or completely orthogonal views of different things. It seems like
> picard is using them to represent a change in state which I would
> think could be done with a change in color or icon, and double your
> screen real estate.
>
> Is there an e-mail discussion or chatlog somewhere that goes into the
> reasoning?
>
> I was looking to try and lend a hand if I could, but looking at:
>
> http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/query?component=Picard
> +Tagger&milestone=Picard+Qt&order=status
>
> It seems like there are no open bugs. Am I understanding correctly?
>
> Will
>
> On Jan 10, 2008 8:18 PM, Chad Wilson <chad.wilson at gmx.net> wrote:
> What you're asking for is quite possible if you use a media
> player that
> is, well, probably not WinAMP; i.e. one that allows you to
> search and
> index by structured tag data, not filenames, which (my
> opinion) are
> generally a poor mechanism to build playlists on.
>
> Even if you change the file to be named "artist - track", by
> default the
> track numbers and album name are saved to the music file tags
> inside the
> file header, so with a player that respects these in its
> library, you
> could sort/group by album and play a whole album.
>
> Picard and MusicBrainz are album/release-centric, yes. Picard
> is
> oriented towards /tagging/ i.e. persisting all known data in a
> structured way to ID3(or equivalent) music file tag headers.
> Playlists
> are a user-concern, i.e. nothing to do with the shared server
> data that
> MB seeks to capture.
>
> I guess one could consider "by album" to be one form of
> playlist for an
> entire artist's tracks; but really, playlists are a separate
> concern in
> my mind. MB and Picard are about getting correct data into
> files, not
> about making choices for you about how you should play your
> music. This
> should be a concern for the music player of choice, and the
> efficiency
> with which it allows you to sort, find and query for
> music /based/ on
> those tags.
>
> Anyway, Picard is equally suited towards customising the way
> in which
> files are name as to tags saved to files. It's somewhat
> power-user like,
> but if you want to change which tags, and the way tags are
> saved from
> MB's data, you may want to check out TaggerScript at
> http://musicbrainz.org/doc/PicardQt/Scripting, part of Picard
> 0.9.0.
>
> Chad / voiceinsideyou
>
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-users mailing list
> MusicBrainz-users at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
More information about the MusicBrainz-users
mailing list