similar to: Feedback on XML metadata namespace

A month or two ago I sent an email to this list proposing to expand the list of "standard" tags for Ogg Vorbis. No tag would be required, but if you wanted to encode certain types of information about a file, you could use a standard tag. I went through the whole discussion, and revised my proposal in light of all the comments from everyone. Here is the updated proposal. This

On 9 Sep 2007 at 23:11, Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > To me, Vorbis comments are insufficient. Ask anyone playing in an ensamble > if they would like recognition. Ask the record label holding the rights to > a song. Ask the music geek that wants his music collection sorted by > something other than artist, album, or release year. They would all prefer > this to Vorbis comments.

Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > On Monday 17. September 2007 07:47:19 David K. Gasaway wrote: >> Even today, I use my own "metadata format" -- essentially a superset of >> vorbis comments. There is one file per release, even with a multi-disc >> release. As a final part of the ripping process, I apply this metadata >> to the FLAC or Vorbis files. > > Why

David K. Gasaway wrote: > Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: >> On Monday 17. September 2007 07:47:19 David K. Gasaway wrote: >>> Even today, I use my own "metadata format" -- essentially a superset of >>> vorbis comments. There is one file per release, even with a multi-disc >>> release. As a final part of the ripping process, I apply this metadata

On Saturday 08. September 2007 11:40:05 Ian Malone wrote: > Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > > Hi again list, > > > > Attached is a much improved version of yesterday's draft. Introducing > > the audio:collection:artwork element to deal with album cover graphics > > and such. > > > > After giving it much though; I decided to drop the audio:preformers

On Monday 10. September 2007 00:00:43 David K. Gasaway wrote: > On 9 Sep 2007 at 23:11, Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > > To me, Vorbis comments are insufficient. Ask anyone playing in an > > ensamble if they would like recognition. Ask the record label holding > > the rights to a song. Ask the music geek that wants his music > > collection sorted by something other than

I mentioned sub-tagging in an earlier post. Here's a more in-depth mail on what i thought of. One of the debates going on here are whether ARTIST is worthy of life. Another is whether the average user will bother filling in the detailed info Jonathan wants. Of course, all tags are optional, but nevertheless we should have a tagging-system that pleases _the_users_, that is, everybody: 1.

Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > Hi again list, > > Attached is a much improved version of yesterday's draft. Introducing the > audio:collection:artwork element to deal with album cover graphics and > such. > > After giving it much though; I decided to drop the audio:preformers and > audio:recording elements. They have been replaced by audio:entities which > is

On 16 Sep 2007 at 22:10, Ralph Giles wrote: > These applications are complementary. Many music players do have their > own database, and it makes sense to keep metadata there, if only as a > cache. It is also to have metadata in the file itself, so that when it > is moved, copied, posted for download by others, or just indexed by > another music player instance it is easily

In an effort to redeem my earlier flame, here is my attempt at rewording the standard to correct the flaws I see in it. The latest draft as writting by Jonathan is prefixed with >>. My comments have > before them. My rewritten version includes no line prefix. >>Jonathon Walther wrote: >David Mitchell commented: A Modest Proposal >>Proposal for a Vorbis TAG Standard

On Saturday 08. September 2007 19:11:54 Carsten Haese wrote: > On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 17:08 +0200, Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > > I feel that these ?Vorbis comments? are not sufficient. There is not > > even a standard for their field names. > > Actually, there is: http://xiph.org/vorbis/doc/v-comment.html No standard. But ?Below is a proposed, minimal list of standard field

Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: > On Saturday 08. September 2007 11:40:05 Ian Malone wrote: >> Daniel Aleksandersen wrote: >>> Hi again list, >>> >>> Attached is a much improved version of yesterday's draft. Introducing >>> the audio:collection:artwork element to deal with album cover graphics >>> and such. >>> >>> After

What does this mean? >Feb 19 07:58:11 apophis upsmon[533]: [ID 702911 daemon.alert] Master privileges unavailable on UPS [ups@apophis] >Feb 19 07:58:11 apophis upsmon[533]: [ID 702911 daemon.alert] Reason: Access denied And is it normal for my UPS (APC SmartUPS 620) to drop into battery mode for a few seconds every day or so? Or is this a main supply glitch? Nothing else in the house

On 11 Sep 2007 at 9:15, Ian Malone wrote: > You can put the comments in, but they're not supported > anywhere. The existence of a spec which explicitly > provides for them from the start (rather than a page > in some corner of the internet) might help change that. I couldn't agree with you more - I've said it *many* times myself. :) Look, people seem to be getting the

On 14 Sep 2007 at 15:52, Ian Malone wrote: > Vorbis comments could do better than they currently do > but no-one seems compelled to implement any of the exotic > tag proposals that have hung around for years. Exotic tag proposals?! Do you mean the ones linked from the wiki? As far can tell, the only roadblock to "implementation" (by which, I assume you mean support from

The biggest problem with Vorbis comments are too loose specifications and too little standardisation. Another problem is attribution of involved parties. Currently only the ARTIST field name is supported in software. More standardised field names need to be worked out for organisations and persons involved in the production of the recording. See:

On Monday 10. September 2007 01:10:44 Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 9/10/07, Daniel Aleksandersen <aleksandersen@runbox.com> wrote: > > It is indeed necessary. I hope this format will be a huge leap in > > metadata descriptions for media content. Not only for music, but any > > media found in Oggs. > > You are thinking too small. Such standards

Hi, I just registered. I have a problem related to wine: lmms can run some vst plugins with VeSTige, so I tried to get ez drummer working. It didn't work, so I downloaded Toontrack Solo, that is a program needed to run ez drummer as a standalone, and not as a plugin. It still wouldn't work, neither as a standalone. I made a few searches and I found out that it needed mfc42.dll so I

I am no longer able to access CVS: Logging in to :pserver:anoncvs@xiph.org:2401/usr/local/cvsroot cvs [login aborted]: recv() from server xiph.org: Connection reset by peer I had no problems a few days ago. -- -:-:- David K. Gasaway -:-:- XNS : =David K Gasaway -:-:- Email: dave@gasaway.org -:-:- Web : dave.gasaway.org <p><p>--- >8 ---- List archives:

vcomment.c contains this line: fprintf(stderr, "Vorbiscomment " VERSION "\n"); I can't figure how / where VERSION is defined. <p> -- -:-:- David K. Gasaway -:-:- XNS : =David K Gasaway -:-:- Email: dave@gasaway.org -:-:- Web : dave.gasaway.org <p><p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: