Index Artwork

[DavidHB]

(20-12-2022 16:13)simoncn Wrote:  Yes, this is the reason for what you are seeing. Your indexed tag is ComposerSort and this is why you need to use the ComposerSort value for the image filename.

So the rule, which might be stated explicitly in the User Guide, is that the artwork filename should be the same as the value of the associated indexed tag? Presumably, in the scheme you are considering, folder names would be the same as their indexed tag names. In my example, composer related artwork would reside in a folder called ComposerSort.

(20-12-2022 16:13)simoncn Wrote:  It looks like you are not using Composer tags at all. You have Composer in itemTags but this is apparently not used anywhere. You might be using it in tagFormat but this would not affect index artwork.

I have

tagFormat=ComposerSort.displayFormat={$composer},Title.displayFormat={$composer$​title^^^: }

I think that this completes the picture of what I do.

(20-12-2022 16:13)simoncn Wrote:  The normal way to associate Composer with ComposerSort is to have Composer in indexTags, ComposerSort in itemTags and Composer.value.sort={ComposerSort} in tagValue (see this section). If you want the sort value (Bach, Johann Sebastian) to appear in your Composer index, you can use Composer.value.index.sort={ComposerSort} instead of Composer.value.sort={ComposerSort}.

I don't know exactly how I came to do what I did (I have been using this scheme for composer-related tags for eight or nine years), but it is unlikely that my small bear brain put it all together without some guidance. Is it possible that I set up my scheme before tagValue offered its current range of options?

My scheme works for me (unless you decide to deprecate it for some reason), and I tend to work on the basis that you don't fix things that aren't broken. But I can see how the normal arrangement is a better way of doing things for people who are starting from scratch.

David