[ogg-dev] Multimedia Metadata Format (M3F) draft
aleksandersen+xiphlists at runbox.com
Wed Dec 5 12:10:21 PST 2007
On 2007-12-04 13:16, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 04/12/2007, Daniel Aleksandersen wrote:
> > The two sections that really need work is the related texts and
> > performers. I do not know if lyrics and subtitles (text resources)
> > needs to be described in any way. The performers section is basically
> > finished but needs work on the role and as attributes.
> (comments added to wiki)
> I still feel there's something not quite right about having instruments
> on the same level as roles/contributions rather than one level below.
> To me it seems that if an actor plays a part then their character has
> the same type of relationship to their role as an actor as an
> instrument has to a musician's role as an instrumentalist.
Introducing a ‘role’ child element of the metadata:performer element would
fix this. But then the instrument/artist-role should be changed in this
way as well. Other input?
> Source is a bit weak currently. If it's going to use a fixed
> vocabularly it needs at least 'other' in addition to 'unknown'. Also a
> little ill-defined in a way; you might have ripped it off a CD or
> encoded from FLAC, but where was it before that? I can see this might
> be useful for organising music collections though.
If it is unknown than no data/attribute would be included. The data does
not exist; so why include anything? :-) But the vocabulary is not
finished. ‘Other’ may be included but I do not think it will be good for
anything. It is not good for sorting or anything. The valuses I have
provided are the ones I could think of. Others must contribute as well!
More information about the ogg-dev