Well it's not a matter of working out what I <i>want</i> to support so much as solving a problem introduced by what others partially <i>do</i> support before it gains multiple <a href="http://www.id3.org/Compliance_Issues">nonstandard implementaions</a> to resolve the issues as initially presented (metadata evolves as people use it and discover new applications for it). Currently, I don't know of any player with a user rating system that supports encoding this particular piece of data to ID3 precisely <i>because</i> there's currently no room for it in the standard frames, but we've can't help but accept that that doesn't necessarily stop them.<br>
<br>Looking back over the documentation, I note that having multiple TXXX frames <i>is</i> actually allowed (I hadn't acutually caught that before, somehow), making it potentially acceptable, but at least to my sensibilities it still screams of being a hack-- if we accept that using any particular software shouldn't have any chance of changing the results of a user's experience, then using a TXXX frame would rule itself out by the virtue of having no standard name for the Description of a user rating. In a bad case, we might end up with five or six popular audio players all storing their ratings in the same basic manner with slightly different descriptions such that they are all mutually incompatible.<br>
<br>For the time being, I'm not going to implement rating storage for any audio players, pending further discussion of this matter, but my targets are Amarok, Quod Libet, and Rhythmbox currently, and whatever happens to hove into view after that. I live in Linux space, so while I might file bug reports outside, most of it cannot be fixed by me.<br>
<br>73,<br>Wyatt<br><br>PS: Having said all that, if it's important, I can survey at least a few audio players, though I don't have any Windows or MacOS machines around me.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 22:20, Ben Bennett <<a href="mailto:fiji@ayup.limey.net">fiji@ayup.limey.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="Ih2E3d">On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 11:40:22AM -0400, Wyatt wrote:<br>
> So what do you suppose I should do?<br>
<br>
</div>Ugh. Nasty problem. I'd survey the field and see what the other<br>
programs are storing... BUT iTunes doesn't even put the rating in the<br>
ID3 tag.<br>
<br>
So, once you know what the others do, work out which you care about<br>
supporting then support one or more of the tags they write.<br>
<br>
That said... if I didn't care at all about the other programs, I'd<br>
just use the POPM field and map the 0-255 range to whatever I wanted<br>
to display. So 0-100 would be mapped with a multipler (2.5248), and<br>
the effective 0-10 range of stars would be mapped with (25.248) with<br>
the hope that was what other implementations would do...<br>
<br>
If you do survey any other programs, please put notes about this in<br>
the wiki, and/or report back to the list... it is something I am<br>
intereted in and I assume others are too.<br>
<br>
-ben<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <a href="mailto:id3v2-unsubscribe@id3.org">id3v2-unsubscribe@id3.org</a><br>
For additional commands, e-mail: <a href="mailto:id3v2-help@id3.org">id3v2-help@id3.org</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>