Flexible Tag Mapping

Feature requests that have been implemented will be filed here.
musoware
Site Admin
Posts: 1847
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:50 am

Re: Flexible Tag Mapping

Post by musoware »

MDE wrote:That seems to work nicely. Now I can map "Arranger" into "Performer" as "(Arr. Arranger's name)".
Am I right in assuming that only one tag should be included in each format value?
No, any number.
MDE
Posts: 479
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:05 am

Re: Flexible Tag Mapping

Post by MDE »

OK, thanks. I see that the "conditional" option requires all fields to be non-blank to get a result. E.g., if I put in "(Arr. #ARRANGER); #PERFORMER" and tick the box, then if Arranger is present, but Performer is not, then the absence of a Performer means that the Arranger doesn't get mapped either. To apply the conditional option separately, and get the result I want in this case, means using two lines (if performer is not mapped explicitly then it will be overwitten by the Arranger mapping). Also, I notice in playing around with this that imported fields will persist, even if removed from the import definition and the folder re-imported.
musoware
Site Admin
Posts: 1847
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:50 am

Re: Flexible Tag Mapping

Post by musoware »

MDE wrote:OK, thanks. I see that the "conditional" option requires all fields to be non-blank to get a result. E.g., if I put in "(Arr. #ARRANGER); #PERFORMER" and tick the box, then if Arranger is present, but Performer is not, then the absence of a Performer means that the Arranger doesn't get mapped either. To apply the conditional option separately, and get the result I want in this case, means using two lines (if performer is not mapped explicitly then it will be overwitten by the Arranger mapping).
It will combine 2 or more format lines if you specify a muso field more than once, allowing you to attach the conditional "condition" to just one part of the combined format. It automatically joins with a separator but thinking about it now I think this should be left to the user to define (I had assumed this would be used to define multiple artists but it could be used to simply combine two or more elements into one value like your example), so I have taken this out in build 01:

Build 01: If the same Muso field is specified more than once the result is combined without a separator (allows you to make certain parts conditional).
MDE wrote:Also, I notice in playing around with this that imported fields will persist, even if removed from the import definition and the folder re-imported.
I think what you are saying is that if you remove a field format from the config and re-import the previously deduced fields will remain - yes they will, though if it's a standard field there is a new "Tags are master" option to make tags take precedence over different values in Muso fields on a file/folder scan (to complement the "LMS is Master" option). Also if you change a definition it will force the import to overwrite them, so you can change the definition to blank for a custom field if you want to clear previously deduced values.
MDE
Posts: 479
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:05 am

Re: Flexible Tag Mapping

Post by MDE »

Ah, but what I want is to have the separate conditionality and for Muso to add the separator - just as it was. If I have to add a separator, then it will show even if there is only one value, surely?
musoware
Site Admin
Posts: 1847
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:50 am

Re: Flexible Tag Mapping

Post by musoware »

MDE wrote:Ah, but what I want is to have the separate conditionality and for Muso to add the separator - just as it was. If I have to add a separator, then it will show even if there is only one value, surely?
If you want "(Arr. #ARRANGER); #PERFORMER" in your Performer field then specify two entries which feed Performer, the first will be "(Arr. #ARRANGER);" including the separator and the second will be "#PERFORMER", and both will be conditional. True enough if you then have an ARRANGER tag and no PERFORMER tag it will include a trailing separator when it needn't have one, but that should affect the presentation (other than in database view) since Muso should still take this as a single entry provided you have configured ; as a separator.
MDE
Posts: 479
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:05 am

Re: Flexible Tag Mapping

Post by MDE »

Many thanks for all the work on this, it gives the user a fairly easy way of controlling how the tags appear. The temptation to fine-tune, however, (e.g. including Arranger, which I have now put before the Artist) means that one could soon run out of rows for actions. So far I'm up to 11, but I could probably bring it down to 10.
musoware
Site Admin
Posts: 1847
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:50 am

Re: Flexible Tag Mapping

Post by musoware »

MDE wrote:Many thanks for all the work on this, it gives the user a fairly easy way of controlling how the tags appear. The temptation to fine-tune, however, (e.g. including Arranger, which I have now put before the Artist) means that one could soon run out of rows for actions. So far I'm up to 11, but I could probably bring it down to 10.
It's fairly easy to increase it to 15. With a bit more work I can make it unlimited, in a scrolling grid, but then the temptation will be for users to take it too far! It has to process all these rules on every file scanned or song read from LMS remember - too many formatting rules could cripple performance.
MDE
Posts: 479
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:05 am

Re: Flexible Tag Mapping

Post by MDE »

I agree that you don't want to overdo it. For more complex stuff it's better to use mp3tag anyway. Perhaps a more useful line of future enhancement for the album view might be to customise how tags get displayed in Muso. For example, display "Band (Cond. Conductor)" instead of Conductor, Band, or to display Instrument after Artist name as in "Artist (Instrument)". This can be done through import actions now - for the first you need to blank out Conductor as well as mapping the two tags to Band, to avoid duplication. The only real problem with the import actions approach to this is that you then have the extra data imbedded in the Artist and Band fields which messes up the linking and hierarchy views etc. For that reason, I'm happy to leave it alone. BTW I find myself using the filter box a lot, where this matters less - it is so quick to just type in e.g. "Beethoven Sonata". Just thinking aloud, really, but I think that Muso is really becoming the best music organisation software for classical music lovers, following the developments over the last few months. It may be a good idea to start a thread on the general direction of future development.
Post Reply