Topic: MC doesn't populate Publisher field though it's present in tag dump (Read 3009 times)

8139david · « **on:** February 08, 2019, 01:04:30 am »

I have flac files with a Publisher tag populated. This tag shows up in MC tag dump, as well as when using metaflac (below I just show the last two tags):

Code: [Select]

METADATA block #3
  type: 4 (VORBIS_COMMENT)
  is last: false
  length: 403
  vendor string: reference libFLAC 1.3.1 20141125
  comments: 15
    ....
    comment[13]: PUBLISHER=Sony Classical
    comment[14]: COMPOSER=Georg Friedrich Händel

However, MC's field Publisher is empty.
Is there a solution so that MC can read correctly the PUBLISHER tag from the flac file?

Spike1000 · « **Reply #1 on:** February 08, 2019, 03:10:17 am »

Something definitely amiss here. Writing a test 'Publisher' tag in MC writes it to the the

Code: [Select]

comment[27]: ORGANIZATION=Test2 tag. MP3Tag sees it as PUBLISHER though.

Looks like the fun and games of Tag mapping once again.

Spike

8139david · « **Reply #2 on:** February 08, 2019, 03:37:07 am »

I had noticed that.
And one can't even create a proper Publisher field, since the name is already pre-empted by MC.

Currently, MC uses Album Artist as field but creates two tags: ALBUMARTIST and ALBUM ARTIST.

So it could do the same for Publisher, which would be linked to two tags, ORGANIZATION and PUBLISHER.

Or just change MC so that when it finds a PUBLISHER tag, it puts it in its own ORGANIZATION tag.

But a solution is needed!

Spike1000 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 08, 2019, 03:51:26 am »

Quote from: 8139david on February 08, 2019, 03:37:07 am

I had noticed that.

Pity you didn't mention that, would have saved me telling you something you already knew

https://help.mp3tag.de/main_tags.html

Spike

8139david · « **Reply #4 on:** February 08, 2019, 03:54:33 am »

Let's just keep on topic, sorry.

Matt · « **Reply #5 on:** February 08, 2019, 07:59:20 am »

We do read and write the PUBLISHER field to ORGANIZATION for FLAC files.

This is just in a block with other conversions because that's hopefully more standard.

8139david · « **Reply #6 on:** February 08, 2019, 08:33:34 am »

Thanks for your response.
But as indicated, my flac files have a filled PUBLISHER tag, but MC doesn't read it (except in the Tag dump).
What could be the problem?

Matt · « **Reply #7 on:** February 08, 2019, 08:36:44 am »

Quote from: 8139david on February 08, 2019, 08:33:34 am

The flac files have a filled PUBLISHER tag, but MC doesn't read it (except in the Tag dump).

We're looking for a filled ORGANIZATION tag instead.

8139david · « **Reply #8 on:** February 08, 2019, 08:38:53 am »

I see.
Couldn't you also look for a PUBLISHER tag?
The music in question comes from Deezer and all their albums contain a PUBLISHER tag.

Spike1000 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 08, 2019, 09:53:07 am »

Matt's comment about "more standard" is key here. There isn't a standard. ORGANIZATION to PUBLISHER mapping is included in this table here:

https://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Tag_Mapping

So it's not unique to MC. A simple bulk copy of one tag to another would get around it.

Spike

8139david · « **Reply #10 on:** February 08, 2019, 10:06:28 am »

The most relevant line of the table you mention is this one:

In any case, why not change this problematic behavior of MC in a future build?
For isn't incredible that a field that is called Publisher doesn't read the PUBLISHER tag?
Would that be difficult to change MC so that it does so?
(Or else at least call the pre-defined field 'Organization' instead of 'Publisher', if that's MC's definitive choice?)

Spike1000 · « **Reply #11 on:** February 08, 2019, 11:07:13 am »

Your comments may apply to here and now, but design decisions may have been made long ago in the past when things weren't as they are now. I think the MP3Tag mapping on the same page is a clue to the fact things were actually different in the past and the mapping of PUBLISHER field to ORGANIZATION was poignant and relevant at one time.

Changing behaviour may have consequences to MC that you might not be aware of. I fear things are often not as one dimensional as you think they may be.

Hopefully MC can be updated to reflect the here and now at some point. At least there's a simple work around in the mean time.

Spike

JimH · « **Reply #12 on:** February 08, 2019, 03:20:32 pm »

Quote from: 8139david on February 08, 2019, 10:06:28 am

For isn't incredible that a field that is called Publisher doesn't read the PUBLISHER tag?

It might if the case matched.

8139david · « **Reply #13 on:** February 08, 2019, 03:49:56 pm »

I'm sorry but I don't see the point since MC doesn't distinguish case when naming fields. Can you explain?

JimH · « **Reply #14 on:** February 08, 2019, 04:15:31 pm »

The case must match. Try it.

8139david · « **Reply #15 on:** February 09, 2019, 02:53:02 am »

I must be misunderstanding something.
Using metaflac, I just added a Publisher tag (case exactly matching the Publisher field of MC).
MC still doesn't read it (except in the Tag Dump); see that attached picture.

Spike1000 · « **Reply #16 on:** February 11, 2019, 02:45:21 am »

Try 'PUBLISHER' rather than 'Publisher'. The official tag is in capitals and the case must match exactly as Jim said.

Spike

8139david · « **Reply #17 on:** February 11, 2019, 03:23:13 am »

Unfortunately, that's the very problem stated in the first post.
The flac files have a PUBLISHER tag, but MC doesn't read it.
Cf the example I was giving:

Code: [Select]

METADATA block #3
  type: 4 (VORBIS_COMMENT)
  is last: false
  length: 403
  vendor string: reference libFLAC 1.3.1 20141125
  comments: 15
    ....
    comment[13]: PUBLISHER=Sony Classical
    comment[14]: COMPOSER=Georg Friedrich Händel

I know this isn't the biggest problem in the world. And of course copy-paste by the user is always possible.
But still, couldn't something be done to fix this strange behavior of MC?

RoderickGI · « **Reply #18 on:** February 11, 2019, 07:16:56 am »

It seems that at least at one stage PUBLISHER was proposed to be added to the Ogg Vorbis Comments section of a file, and that it should take precedence over ORGANISATION if it existed.

Quote

ORGANIZATION
The organization responsible for producing the album; i.e., the record label.
PUBLISHER
The organization responsible for publishing the album. This is often the same as ORGANIZATION. If this is the case, both should be given to allow for searching by PUBLISHER and CATALOGNUMBER, but if PUBLISHER is missing, it should be assumed to be the same as ORGANIZATION.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120429102447/http://reallylongword.org/vorbiscomment/

I found that in a quick search. I have no idea if the proposals were adopted. I'm sure someone (David?) could find a more up to date and official reference.

But if the proposals were adopted, it would make sense for MC to read the PUBLISHER tag and put it into the [Publisher] field, and if the PUBLISHER tag didn't exist, but the ORGANISATION tag did, then the ORGANISATION tag should be put into the [Publisher] field.

Of course, you could then debate whether MC should have both fields in the Library (it doesn't have [Organisation]), and whether it should write both tags, and how they get related. But the above would seem to meet requirements without breaking anything...

...Well, it would be annoying if a file was imported with a PUBLISHER tag, which was written to the [Publisher] field, which then got modified and written to the ORGANISATION tag, and then the file was re-imported (forgetting Sidecar files for now) or imported into a new Library, so that the old PUBLISHER tag was used instead of the updated ORGANISATION tag. But that is tagging for you. Always a compromise, and always different opinions. Not much really in the way of internally and externally consistent standards.

PS: It isn't possible to add a [PUBLISHER] field to MC to see if MC would import the tag from the file, as MC already has a [Publisher] field, so any attempt to add the field results in it being automatically renamed "PUBLISHER (1)". Nor is it possible to edit the existing [Publisher] field to make it [PUBLISHER].

dtc · « **Reply #19 on:** February 11, 2019, 08:22:49 am »

In the hydrogenaudio document that Spike linked to above, it appears that mapping Organization to the Publisher field is an option meant to be implemented by a user defined mapping option. It originally was part of the MP3tag program, but was adopted in ID3v2.45. As such, it seems like the standard would allow Publisher to be mapped to PUBLISHER, which is, in fact, the definition in the table, as the OP pointed out.

Roderick - Just saw your PS. I tried adding PUBLISHER also and concur with your findings. Glad you wrote it up first so I did not have to.

8139david · « **Reply #20 on:** February 11, 2019, 03:37:43 pm »

[Sorry about this post.]

RoderickGI · « **Reply #21 on:** February 11, 2019, 03:56:55 pm »

Yes, the little table at the bottom of the page shows that the mapping of a VorbisComment ORGANISATION to PUBLISHER is predefined in mp3tag's initial configuration, so MC is in fact doing the correct thing in that respect, for files imported into MC. In terms of updates once the file is in the MC Library, how MC works is debatable. But at least it is being consistent. On import: ORGANISATION --> PUBLISHER. On update: PUBLISHER --> ORGANISATION.

But checking through the references for that document, you can quickly see that mappings are the best guess by each application involved, and are not completely consistent. I don't think MP3TAG is the definitive reference for tag mapping. It is just another one of the applications whose developers have tried to untangle the mess that is file tagging. JRiver has the same right to untangle that mess as they see fit. But I think my suggestion above makes sense.

Anyway, Spike has already given the answer way back:

Quote from: Spike1000 on February 08, 2019, 09:53:07 am

So it's not unique to MC. A simple bulk copy of one tag to another would get around it.

8139david · « **Reply #22 on:** February 11, 2019, 04:08:57 pm »

As you acknowledge, MC doesn't populate the Publisher field, even though it's given a Publisher tag.

JimH · « **Reply #23 on:** February 11, 2019, 04:31:01 pm »

8139,
You're not helping your cause with your snide remarks. I edited your last post.
It isn't yet clear what is right.
Please use the workaround.

8139david · « **Reply #24 on:** February 11, 2019, 04:31:12 pm »

[OK, I give up.]

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: MC doesn't populate Publisher field though it's present in tag dump (Read 3009 times)