Streamlining the browsing tree & multiple configs

[simoncn]

(23-09-2013 12:54)DavidHB Wrote:  This seems clear (and very interesting), and usefully amplifies the 'Groups and Compositions' section of the User Guide. It might be helpful to provide a usage example in that section. Those who, like me, never miss an opportunity to misread a manual will then understand that Group is a specific tag that is so named. I know that the capital letter should have been a clue ...

I will think about a suitable example for the User guide. I don't think the referenced Biber album is the best example to use, because it doesn't reflect normal usage of the Group tag. This example was intended to show that Group can used in other ways than as a synonym for Composition.

Quote:I'd also like to check the implications for my metadata structure. Is the following correct?

Both the 'Work' (aka 'Composition') and 'Group' tags would become standard within the structure, though not necessarily used.

Yes

Quote:Both Work and Group would be need to be in indexTags (the User Guide is silent on this).

Group does not need to be in either indexTags or itemTags, but you can include it in indexTags if you want to have a Group index entry.

Quote:Information in Work would typically not be duplicated in Track. This implies that for both to show up in the track listing on the Control Point, there would need to be a tagFormat entry of something like Track.displayFormat={$work$track$}.

Yes

Quote:Group would not be displayed as such; but would only be used as a substitute for Track when displaying the group name rather than individual track names. The data in Group would typically be either the same as Work or (as in your example) a subset of the track data common to all tracks in the group.

This might need further discussion, as I'm not sure exactly how to interpret some of your comments. For example, Group would be displayed instead of Album in the control point's Now Playing screen. Also, I don't know what you mean by saying the data in Group is a subset of the track data. My example was not intended to show this, and it would not normally be the case. Rather, my example was meant to show that a single Composition could consist of multiple Groups.

Quote:The indexing and display would still work satisfactorily (i.e. send correct and appropriately ordered data to the Control Point) irrespective of whether neither, either or both of the Work and Group fields were populated in a particular file.

Yes