gtgbr at gmx.net
Fri Dec 7 19:58:43 PST 2001
Jonathan Walther wrote:
> I wish you had read all the posts on the thread before posting this. I
> already posted that DISCID, ISRC, and similar tags are now stricken from
> the standard unless someone speaks up for them. Slothy suggested it; I
> now second it.
Sorry, it's simply impossible for me to read the whole thread.
Concerning ISRC, this already is a standard tag, and since I am the one
who suggested it, I like it. ;-)
> > role fulfilled by COMPOSER, LYRICIST, PERFORMER, ENSEMBLE,
> > CONDUCTOR, AUTHOR, PRODUCER, and ARRANGER tags.
> >You need this data neither in your playlist nor prior to downloading a
> If you had read the standard, all tags are optional. You can even
> release an ogg with no tags whatsoever. I'm starting to feel like a
> broken record here.
Me too ... of course I could omit most, if not all of those standard
tags. I do that regularly anyways, I hardly make use of the COMMENT and
DESCRIPTION tags for example. What I am saying is that your standard
splits the ARTIST tag into categories that, when done right, should all
be used (more or less). ARTIST might be diffuse, but it's all-inclusive
and concise (if that's the right word). Lots of tags == confusing, few
expressive tags == simple and effective.
You're demanding too much from the average user. I doubt that many
teenage pop fans know that N-Sync don't "make music". To make myself
clear, have no expectations towards the average user's care and
knowledge if you want to be successful. The average user is always in a
hurry, doesn't care and doesn't want to know. The average user never
reads manuals and how-tos. Have a look at Microsoft ... they treat their
users like total dumbasses and they make several fortunes from it.
> >If you buy an OGG file, you should get this information by the
> >vendor ...
> Be realistic. Most ogg files will be shared among friends and complete
> strangers on the internet.
Exact, and that's why I think that a "too intelligent" standard is too
much. People won't use it and stick to the stupid ID3 scheme. I can only
repeat myself, your intentions are great, but it's too complicated!
Segher made some nice meta-data categories. In my opinion, standard tags
should only deal with category 1. Category 2 is covered by custom tags,
that could be used in customized databases and indices. Category 3 is
definitely the XML thing. The XML meta-data allows to cascade meta-data,
e.g. something like this: (d'oh, I hope this will be valid XML now ...
The Big Medley Megamix
00:00 - 02:25
02:26 - 04:12
Then, there was that nice Karaoke idea that could be achieved with XML
and the lyrics as well ...
> the URL should go in an ADDENDUM tag.
I'm used to use the URL tag as this is a default tag in VCE - this had
nothing to do with your standard, sorry.
> >Btw, point 2) in your mail about your goals is already fulfilled by the
> >ISRC tag. Every recording has a different, unique ISRC, so it should be
> >trivial to get the correct CD once you got that number.
> Use of an ISRC tag goes against point 3), which is necessary for
> embedded devices. No access to the Internet or external databases
> should be required!
The ISRC is in no way dependent on the Internet. To find out which
record you're listening to with a certain ISRC, you make two phone
calls. One to IFPI to find out who the registrar is and the second to
the registrar himself, to find out what recording number xxxxx is. The
first call might be obsolete if you happen to have internet access and
find a current list of registrars.
> >I really don't want these tags to become standard. The standards should
> >not go beyond simple tags that are required for proper "playback", if
> >one may say it that way. The whole rest needs to adapt to too many
> >different possible scenarios to become a standard.
> I, and many others, disagree. No tags are required for proper playback,
> ergo, by your reasoning, ogg should drop tag support altogether. Unless
Grmpf. No! All I'm saying all the time is "keep it simple!". A too
comprehensive standard will make the average user feel stupid and he
won't use it!
> the common ogg-playing tools support them, tags are useless. Unless
> tags are standardized, the ogg-playing tools won't support them.
The OGG players are written by reasonable people. If they find your tags
useful, they'll support them. Ask them! But it's another thing whether
to force a too-high standard on every user. The standard should be
simple. The more simple it is, the more likely it will be used. There's
enough room for caring and intelligent people to get what they want ...
thanks to the OGG tagging system. Supporting new tags is trivial, so
where's the problem?
> >> When someone sends you a file with a gibbled filename, how do you find
> >> out what the heck it is? What if you really liked it and wanted to run
> >I usually know the artist and the title, propably also the name of the
> >album. If this isn't enough, and there's an ISRC, I'm all set.
> If I gave you a file foo.ogg, how exactly are you going to find out the
> artist and title unless someone has put in appropriate tags?
A foo.ogg with no tags is just as useful with your standard as with any
other standard. If there are any tags, they were most likely ARTIST
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security,
deserve neither liberty or security" - Benjamin Franklin
--- >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.
More information about the Vorbis