1256 /n of discnumber fails to show [#5878]

by **Lowlander** » Mon Jun 24, 2013 11:40 am

MMuser2011 wrote:Is this bug still open?

Yes, it is set as assigned, not closed.

by **MMuser2011** » Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:55 am

Is this bug still open?

I see another problem:
If you edit a track with the visible disc # 2 to the value 2/2, it will be stored to id3tag DISCNUMBER as 2/2/2.

The problem:
In the Edit Window (SHIFT-ENTER on a track) you can't be sure, if the Disc# field visible as 2 is already populated with 2/2. As soon as you edit the visible value 2 to 2/2 it will be added to the final 2/2/2.

by **chrisjj** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:21 am

> Yes, probably in MM 3.1, but it isn't definite yet.

I find no fix made 3.1. I hope it is still planned

EDIT: And needing to make an addition to this Mantis entry but finding none exists, I have created one: http://www.ventismedia.com/mantis/view.php?id=5878

by **chrisjj** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:32 am

Excellent - thanks!

by **jiri** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:31 am

Yes, probably in MM 3.1, but it isn't definite yet.

Jiri

by **chrisjj** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:05 am

> It seems that the only really solution it to include
> [...] Total Disc# fields in MM interface.

Is this planned?

by **chrisjj** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:12 pm

EDIT: (loss is...)

Confirmed fixed in 3.0.2.1134. Thanks!

by **jiri** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:14 am

Right, the specification doesn't explicitely describe this, but I'm sure that many people have tags in this format and thus I think it makes sense to preserve the value there.

In any case, some future update of MM should include more powerful tools for clean up of tags and then it should be easier to e.g. remove all such values, etc.

Jiri

by **chrisjj** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:23 pm

About the Total Disc #, that's great news - thanks.

> Total... Track # will be properly preserved in WMA tags.

I suggest this needs careful thought, since unlike PartOfSet for total disc #, the field used for track #(http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/librar ... S.85).aspx) does not support total track # . I.e. n/m in TrackNumber is non-compliant, and IIUC it is not MM policy to write non-compliant tags.

by **jiri** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:38 am

You are right, this will be fixed in the next release, Total Disc and Track # will be properly preserved in WMA tags.

Jiri

by **chrisjj** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:42 pm

> I.e. when MM scans such a file, it shows you only '1' as Disc# and
> '2' isn't shown. We have to find a way how to best handle this issue.

A far higher priority issue than what MM displays is that MM erases the data from the file, even when the tag being edited is a different one entirely. This needs fixing urgently, regardless of any fix to the display.

by **jiri** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:30 am

Well, it's a little more complicated. The value you enter (i.e. '1/2') is stored in WM/PartOfSet field in WMA tag. It specifies that it can store both Disc# and Total Disc# fields separated by slash. I.e. when MM scans such a file, it shows you only '1' as Disc# and '2' isn't shown.

We have to find a way how to best handle this issue. It seems that the only really solution it to include Tottal Track# and Total Disc# fields in MM interface. I'm not personally a big fan of this approach, but it would probably prevent any further problems.

Jiri

by **chrisjj** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:13 pm

EDIT: was "V3.0.2.1131 SEVERE BUG Loss of second # of WMA PartOfSet", but loss from tag has been fixed, leaving only loss (hiding) from display.

Add/rescanning loses the slash and second number of the WMA PartOfSet tag(displayed as Disc #) from the display and editing ANY tag erases the slash and second number from the tag stored in the file.

E.g.

1 set a track's Disc # to 1/2
2 delete track from Library
3 Add/Rescan
4 See tracklist shows 1 !

This is a severe bug! It will hinder up my testing of MM3 so I hope it can be fixed soon!

1256 /n of discnumber fails to show [#5878]

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: 1256 /n of discnumber fails to show [#5878]

Re: 1256 /n of discnumber fails to show [#5878]

Re: 1256 /n of discnumber fails to show [#5878]

Re:

1256 /n of discnumber fails to show [#5878]