[vorbis] Revised Proposal for Vorbis TAG Standard

[Tuomo Latto]

At 15:35 07.12.01 -0800, you wrote:
>>DESCRIPTION _is_ a bit vague, but ADDENDUM is a bit over the top.
>>What about COMMENT? Couldn't you just use it?
>
>Hm. I'm open to a vote on it.  I like ADDENDUM, but if more people
>prefer COMMENT, we can switch to that.  Besides, COMMENT is 7
>characters, and ADDENDUM is 8.  Lets have votes...

Well, I suppose it's clear what I think...
Nothing wrong with ADDENDUM in general, I just prefer COMMENT. I'm not that 
civilized.

>>However, I don't find separating PERFORMER and ENSEMBLE necessary. Why 
>>not just overload the ARTIST tag (or name it PERFORMER)?
>>You know, people who need to differentiate PERFORMER and ENSEMBLE should 
>>be able to do it by their names.
>
>Can you think of a tag that covers both performers and ensembles nicely?
>(and NOT the ARTIST tag.  maybe the COMPOSER is the artist...).

That's a good point. Too bad I didn't remember that when I wrote this.
PERFORMER would be good. ENSEMBLEs are PERFORMERs.

>> >MEDIA
>>How about using COMMENT?
>
>No, if we do that we'd be getting into putting structure into the
>contents of the tag.  The idea is, 1 tag, one bit of information.  If
>you overload a tag to contain multiple types of bits of information, it
>makes more work for parsing code, and makes it conceptually messier.

Sure, but is that particular piece of information such that it needs to be 
parsed?
Would it be adequate to have it as an additional information to the 
listener (and hence a comment)?
And btw, I'd choose SOURCE or MEDIA even if SOURCEMEDIA is more descriptive.

>> >OPUS
>>So, is OPUS just a number?
>>How about additional TITLE as 'Opus 3'? (Yeah, I might not just get it.)
>
>OPUS is just a number in the normal case.  In special cases you would
>write it out in full "BWV 110", or "K16" for example.
>
>Keeping OPUS separate gives you the flexibility in the player of
>deciding if you want to display the opus as part of the title or not.

Just checking...

>> >LYRICIST
>> >AUTHOR
>>There's a certain conceptual type of ambiguousness here. I don't find it 
>>reasonable to differentiate LYRICIST and AUTHOR. AUTHOR will suffice, 
>>LYRICIST is not really needed.
>
>Not so.  An author may write the original text as prose, then a
>librettist may "adapt" it for the purpose of the musical work.  So both
>author and lyricist are needed.  And if its a song, use lyricist, if
>there is spoken text, use author.  If the text is half-sung half-spoken
>its a judgement call, but I would use author.  What if it is a poem
>embedded in a prose novel?  Then even if the poem is sung I think I
>might still use author... but noone could be faulted for using lyricist.
>(lots of fantasy novels contain embedded lyric poems).

Ok. Once again, kind of forgot all about classical music and its .

>>GENRE should not be limited to any selection of genres. In that case is 
>>TYPE needed? Couldn't you just use one more GENRE tag?
>
>Symphony is not a "genre".  It is a "form" of work, within the
>"classical" genre.

Point taken.
A couple of 'but's, though: (TYPE tag)
In case of 'song' I'd leave it out. In case of 'speech', as specified in 
your proposal, I'd just simply use GENRE tag.
In case of reading poems I'd use GENRE='Poetry'. If I used TYPE='Speech' 
and GENRE='Poetry' the structural hierarchy of these tags would be a 
complete opposite compared to one used in classical music. Perhaps it 
should be thought of as "classical only" tag?

Tuomo

<p><p>--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.