[vorbis] Tag changes

[Ben Pearre]

> I don't think anyone suggested that.  Instead, you'd have the 
> information in PART and would have to either parse it, or name by hand.

Here you go.  The very best recording, using most of the legal tags
(admittedly not to best advantage, but the entry in FreeDB sucked
similarly), and it's still essentially useless:

http://hebb.mit.edu/FreeMusic/Mozart/Don Giovanni

Have fun with it :)

> Zounds!  Various vorbis honchos have strongly opposed specific formats 
> for tags.

Then they are advocating making it very hard to distribute a piece of
music that consists of more than one file.

What this comes down to is whether you believe that it makes sense to
put some necessary information in the filename and other necessary
information in the tags, or whether the tags should be the uniform
method of associating metadata with a file.  Convince me that some
information should ONLY be in the filename and not in the tag!

> >I had more in mind
> >_adding_ TRACKTITLE, but David Gasaway convinced me that it should be
> >PARTTITLE instead...
> 
> I did what?! :)  It might be worthwhile to keep PART even if PARTNUMBER 
> is added.

Ok, close enough.  It's more obvious which is which if they're named
as I suggested, but some of the other tags have very non-intuitive
names, so I bow to precedent there :)


-- 
bwpearre at alumni.princeton.edu                http://hebb.mit.edu/~ben


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: part
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 233 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/vorbis/attachments/20020408/fe054e6a/part.pgp