PDA

View Full Version : problem with [##] as 'article'



Roger the Shrubber
2005-06-05, 14:08
To keep CD's in a collectors box showing up chronologically I have put [01], [02], ... in front of the albums names (and in the file structure). I figured if I added these strings to the 'Articles to ignore when sorting artist names', they would then be ignored in the purely alphabetical listing of the albums. But they are not and they are still listed at the end under '['. Maybe you can't use special characters in that setting? Or, maybe just not '[' but something like {01} or (01) would work?

Alternatively, if anyone has a suggestion on how to deal with this in a different way, I'd like to hear it too.

Comming to think of it, would ignoring the number tags mess up the order in e.g. the result of a search on the Squeezebox?

Cheers,
Wouter

n.b.: this is the same on 6.0.2 and 6.0.3

JJZolx
2005-06-05, 14:51
To keep CD's in a collectors box showing up chronologically I have put [01], [02], ... in front of the albums names (and in the file structure).

You're talking about the album name in the tags, right? The ignore articles isn't applied to album names, just artist names. I'm pretty sure that your tracks will not be seen as being on the same album if you prefix the album name with the disc number. You should be using DISC or DISCNUMBER tags for that. SlimServer should then display the track order correctly.

Roger the Shrubber
2005-06-05, 15:22
Album tags indeed.

The explanation in the interface is then wrong: "A list of articles ("the", "les", "los", etc.) to ignore at the beginning of artist or album names when sorting." So I guess either the text or the behaviour should be fixed.

I definately don't want them to be seen as being on the same album; the albums really do have a different name (e.g. the name of the original releases). The way I have it now, I can play them chronologically from the directory structure. (Directories and album tags are the same and I don't want to break that.)

DISC or DISCNUMBER wouldn't work with albums with different names, would it? Or maybe there is yet another tag to group them anyway, and would that work in SlimServer?

JJZolx
2005-06-05, 17:39
Album tags indeed.

The explanation in the interface is then wrong: "A list of articles ("the", "les", "los", etc.) to ignore at the beginning of artist or album names when sorting." So I guess either the text or the behaviour should be fixed.

I definately don't want them to be seen as being on the same album; the albums really do have a different name (e.g. the name of the original releases). The way I have it now, I can play them chronologically from the directory structure. (Directories and album tags are the same and I don't want to break that.)

DISC or DISCNUMBER wouldn't work with albums with different names, would it? Or maybe there is yet another tag to group them anyway, and would that work in SlimServer?

My bad. I just took a look at the data in the albums table and it looks like this setting is also applied to album names.

I see what you're talking about now - not a disc 1 of 2, disc 2 of 2, but a collection of albums in a boxed set with individual album names. You wouldn't want to use DISC or DISCNUMBER in this case.

There's something odd about how the 'sort' version of artist and album names are stored (though I'm sure there must be a reason for it) - all punctuation is removed and replaced by spaces. It wouldn't surprise me then if the [01], [02], etc. wasn't being parsed out of your album names correctly. You might try just 01, 02.

The thing that strikes me about doing this, though, is that there's nothing special about the albums having been packaged in a collection. If you want these albums sorted chronologically, then you'd likely want this behavior for all artists and all albums. I believe there's an enhancement request for this behavior. I know that personally I'd also prefer this sort order. When you're looking at the albums in your collection from an individual artist, usually it's only a couple of albums, and seldom more than a dozen or two. Thinking in chronological terms would be a lot more intuitive for me - alphabetical order for such a short list is unnecessary.

See:

http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=112

also see

http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=103

As someone else pointed out recently, these requests are about a year and a half old now, so it's hard to say whether or not they'd be given any serious consideration. Can't hurt, though, to vote for them.

Roger the Shrubber
2005-06-06, 04:05
There's something odd about how the 'sort' version of artist and album names are stored (though I'm sure there must be a reason for it) - all punctuation is removed and replaced by spaces.

That seems reasonable enough to me.


It wouldn't surprise me then if the [01], [02], etc. wasn't being parsed out of your album names correctly. You might try just 01, 02.

But it can't be that [] are ignored since the albums end up at the end of the list under '[' and not at the front under '0'.
I'll try when I get home, though I don't want album titles with actual numbers in them ('10 top songs' or something) messed with.


The thing that strikes me about doing this, though, is that there's nothing special about the albums having been packaged in a collection. If you want these albums sorted chronologically, then you'd likely want this behavior for all artists and all albums.

You're right and I guess I'll better review my directory naming strategy. I could add the [year] in front of the name of the directory (not the tag) for those albums that I have the info for, and leave the others alone.

I just voted for the requests.
Thanks!

Roger the Shrubber
2005-06-11, 02:51
Just an update: listing the numbers as \[01\], \[02\] etc. in the interface makes it work. Must have something to do with regular expressions somewhere I guess.

Cheers,
Wouter