MediaMonkey forum

Deal All,

Under "File Properties" there is a dropdown box for "Type". I'd like to add a subcategory of music here. How do I go about adding one? I have added the new category to my media tree but it doesn't show up in "Type". How do I go about adding it here, as well?

Thanks,

- NR

got the same question! hope someone knows the answer!

Types are not able to be customized at this time.

But it is being looked at for a future version of MediaMonkey. http://mediamonkey.com/forum/viewtopic. ... t=new+type

Thanks for the info and for adding that to the list. Peace.
-NR

Any updates on this?

No, none.

For now you can create new category that will include only those you want.

Peke wrote:For now you can create new category that will include only those you want.

for now? That sounds a little bit hopeful; )

The only real problem with not being able to add Types is the inability of assigning Playback Rules to them. Otherwise you don't need Type as Collections can be based on any criteria.

but a collection is simply a view, where a type IS a value. but I think we have had this disccusion before with no ground given

I guess you didn't follow that discussion then. Custom Types in some form or way are still on the agenda and is something I support. However for many this won't be as important as it seems as most are looking for Collections which can already be done (and likely in the same way as Custom Types (if we get criteria based Custom Types (let's hope so))).

dtsig wrote:but a collection is simply a view, where a type IS a value.

You are probably sick of me talking about this (I was very vocal about it in the other thread about it), but it's a meaningless "value". Imagine if instead of "Music", "Video", etc. it was just "A", "B", "C", etc.

Other thread for reference: http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... hilit=type

nohitter151 wrote:

dtsig wrote:but a collection is simply a view, where a type IS a value.

You are probably sick of me talking about this (I was very vocal about it in the other thread about it), but it's a meaningless "value". Imagine if instead of "Music", "Video", etc. it was just "A", "B", "C", etc.

Well im not sick of it if an understand come one way or the other (preferably my way ) I like these bits because i deal with them (and users) every day ...

Yes, it could be a, b or c. But then title could be x, y or z. Who cares? Well I know that a 'file' is more understandable if I know the title is 'He's So Heavy'. And I know that if the type is 'video' i am going to display differently in my ui i am building than I would if the type was 'music'.

Of course I could look at the extension and ASSUME what the file contains from that .. but having a defined TYPE is much easier.

dtsig wrote: And I know that if the type is 'video' i am going to display differently in my ui i am building than I would if the type was 'music'.

Type isn't required for this as this is Collection dependent (Collections aren't Type dependent).

The only 2 places where Type is used and there is no other way around this is in Playback Rules and in Sync Destination in the Device Profile. Collections can't be used here as files can belong to multiple Collections (but only 1 Type). It also means that adding custom Types isn't as straightforward as the interface will need to accommodate them in various places. Also I would hope that with custom Types that we get custom rules to define Type which will add to the complexity of implementation. I hope both get implemented.

My initial comment though wasn't meant to say Type is irrelevant or shouldn't have custom types, but that in many cases Collections will do what the user is looking for. Type isn't required for this to work.