Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

Post a reply

Smilies
:D :) :( :o :-? 8) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :roll: :wink:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

Re: Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

by nohitter151 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:56 pm

mcow wrote:
nohitter151 wrote:
Ludek wrote:- there is usually a lot of files in library and therefore distinguishing between indexes À, A, 1, 2 makes sense for song titles (unlike artist, album).
Well, I would argue that's just silliness. There are hundreds of songs beginning with "T" but they're not broken down further into Ta, Te, Th, Ti...

Also, separate indices for . # ( " and so on continues to be no use. Sorting by the first letter (or digit) in the title would almost always be OK, but barring that, a single all-symbol category would be helpful.

It's as important to make the list of indices manageable as it is to make the list of songs manageable. What's really needed is adaptive indexing, but that doesn't have a chance as along as simplistic advocates for "consistency" have the developers' ear, while people who in fact design UIs professionally and have studied information theory do not.
I can't really comment here, honestly I would never browse over UPnP by title, I think regardless of which nodes are available it is way too cumbersome to be useful. But that is beside the point I want to make, which is that you can use the MagicNodes addon and set up the nodes/subnodes however you wish - and they will also be available over upnp.

Re: Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

by Lowlander » Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:29 am

The MediaMonkey userbase is very diverse and has many use cases. Whereas for some merging title nodes will not be an issue for others it will. Especially as UPnP is very slow to start with, merging nodes will have a much bigger negative impact on users that prefer the separation than the separation has on those who seek merged title nodes. For example international users may require separation (for example ñ is an actual letter in the Spanish alphabet) and having to find tracks among possibly hundreds of tracks will be tedious at best over UPnP. Separation will prevent that problem.

Re: Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

by mcow » Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:29 pm

nohitter151 wrote:
Ludek wrote:- there is usually a lot of files in library and therefore distinguishing between indexes À, A, 1, 2 makes sense for song titles (unlike artist, album).
Well, I would argue that's just silliness. There are hundreds of songs beginning with "T" but they're not broken down further into Ta, Te, Th, Ti...

Also, separate indices for . # ( " and so on continues to be no use. Sorting by the first letter (or digit) in the title would almost always be OK, but barring that, a single all-symbol category would be helpful.

It's as important to make the list of indices manageable as it is to make the list of songs manageable. What's really needed is adaptive indexing, but that doesn't have a chance as along as simplistic advocates for "consistency" have the developers' ear, while people who in fact design UIs professionally and have studied information theory do not.

Re: Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

by nohitter151 » Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:58 pm

mcow wrote:This was implemented well in 1626 for indices of Albums, Album Artist, etc. But the All Tracks indices are still broken out on individual characters.
From the notes in the tracker:
Ludek wrote:- there is usually a lot of files in library and therefore distinguishing between indexes À, A, 1, 2 makes sense for song titles (unlike artist, album).

Re: Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

by mcow » Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:51 am

This was implemented well in 1626 for indices of Albums, Album Artist, etc. But the All Tracks indices are still broken out on individual characters.

Re: Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

by Lowlander » Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:10 pm

Re: Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

by nohitter151 » Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:06 pm

Consolidate some UPnP index nodes

by mcow » Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:34 pm

1) Instead of a separate index node for every different punctuation mark (I have eleven different punctuation categories covering about fifty song titles), have a single [symbol] entry.

2) For names that begin with Roman letters with diacriticals, I'd like to see them included in the base-letter configuration: put Ö under O, for instance.

Top