[vorbis] Re: PROPOSAL: Sub-Tagging
gerry at c64.org
Sat Dec 8 06:19:47 PST 2001
On Saturday 8. December 2001 07:29, Jonathan Walther wrote:
> Why you are trying to create a hierarchy from non-hierarchical
> data is beyond me. You holler "keep it simple!" then shove all
> the complexity into the parsing code and make it nonsensical for
> the eye to read in plain text. There comes a time when you can't factor
> something out any more. Just deal with it, instead of trying to hide
> the complexity in bloaty spots where it will come back and bite you
Non-hierarchical ? Take a second look. The tags are clearly hierarchical.
* Performer, ensemble, conductor etc are all artists, in that they are all
part in carrying out the 'art', in this case, music.
* Title, version, part etc are all tags describing the work itself.
* Album, media, location etc all describe where this work came from.
Putting these into cathegories makes it easier for the end-user to understand
what all these tags are about - The big grey mass of obscure tags are broken
down into something that makes more sense. Remember that we don't create the
tagging system for the coders, we create it for the people using it.
Let's take an example: We have a brain-dead 37337 who have a pc only to be
able to kill his fellow zombies in various 3d shooters. He currently use
windows, and have no problems with that for his purposes. Then, suddenly, The
Hand of God reaches down from the Heavens, removes windows from the computer,
and install Linux in stead. The masses cheers, for Linux is clearly _much_
better than windows, for any purpose, as we all should know. However, the
37337 isn't happy. Suddenly he has to think: He must setup an internet
connection, go to nvidia's site to download binary drivers, enter a console
to install them, then manually edit /etc/X11R6/XFree86Config to load the new
driver and also setup some graphics modes he wants to use - not to mention
getting the monitor timings right. If he had bothered reading some
documentation, it wouldn't really be all that hard, but, beeing an 37337, he
can't read. Now, unable to do what he most want to do, the 37337 does the
next best thing: Go out, buy a rocket launcher, and rule da hood.
Now, what does all this have to do with tagging oggs ? Not a whole lot,
actually, but in a way this is how the average mp3-d00d will look at all
those tags you suggested: "What is this for ? Oh well, I'll just ignore it".
Also, many tags have a somewhat diffuse meaning. Cathergorizing the tags
helps the 37337s figuring out they're for, and also what they're NOT for.
"Oh, so MEDIUM is some sort of origin ? I thought it was the one predicting
the future for the band".
Seriously: Putting the tags into cathergories helps.
> I think you better explain why you think your method is "simpler" than
> the one currently in the proposal. From a coders point of view, yours
> is hella more complex.
This is just plain wrong. As a coder in several programming languages,
including assembly, i don't see why this should be so much more complex. The
tag parsing code is already there, and to modify it for this sub-tagging
system is simple and easy. In any case, as i said above, even if this did
make things so much more complex for the coders, ogg is for the people.
Linux User #229006 * http://counter.li.org
"There is no magic." - Nakor, magic user.
--- >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