Skip to main content
Topic: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error (Read 1949 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

%CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

1) I searched hydrogenaudio for 'Windows Media' and 'WM' in an effort to find if this was asked previously: No results found.
2) I searched the web for any WMA mapping specific to Foobar2000: No results found.
3) I searched the web for answers for hours, for answers to my following problems: No results found.
4) I searched hydrogenaudio again, this time for Content Group and found someone pointed out my issue back in 2014, yet not a single reply. I'm starting a new topic as it is over 120 days old and the red warning felt ominous.
5) I searched hydrogenaudio for mapping: No results found.

The problem I would like to focus on here is the field Content Group. I've test both Tag&Rename & Mp3tag with ID3v2.3, iTunes MP4, Vorbis Comment and WMA and they handle the mapping of this field correctly. On the other hand Foobar2000 only maps it correctly in ID3v2.3 tags. Conversely WMA tags are erroneously tagged with proprietary data that renders them useless.

This is what I've done: In Properties>Advanced>Display>Properties dialog>Standard fields, I can add individual fields to compensate--to a point:
For MP3 files, I add Content Group And it works for MP3s correctly.
For iTunes MP4, rather than Foobar2000 remapping Content Group to ©grp, I have to add a second line for Content Group and point it to ContentGroup in order to mange it in Foobar2000.
For Vorbis Comment files, again, rather than Foobar2000 remapping Content Group to Grouping, I have to add a third line for Content Group and Point it to Grouping in order to mange it in Foobar2000.
For WMA, there is no way to get Foobar2000 to map it correctly. First off, if the correct field WM/ContentGroupDescription already exists in the tag, Foobar2000 fails to display it, anywhere! Second, I've tried CONTENTGROUP, CONTENT GROUP,GROUPING, CONTENTGROUPDESCRIPTION, CONTENT GROUP DESCRIPTION and even the correct WM/ContentGroupDescription. Each and every variation I tried, when adding the data to the file's tag in WMA files, not only did Foobar2000 not map it correctly, Foobar2000 added it's own proprietary prefix of Foobar2000/. Making the last attempt of WM/ContentGroupDescription turn into the hideous Foobar2000/WM/ContentGroupDescription.

CarlitoGil link=msg=884014 date=1418109310 addressed this issue, and correctly stated how the field is to be mapped, yet his post was completely ignored, so I will actually state questions with the hope of getting an answer that will help everyone concerned.

Why does Foobar2000 handle, or in this case, mishandle Content Group so badly? If there is a reason out there, that directly explains why Content Group must be handled this way, when all others, including hydrogenaudio's own wiki page handle it correctly-- if there's information that I've missed that specifically addresses Content Group's handling in Foobar2000, please post the URL!

Regards,
Tem

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #1
It's been over two weeks. Since no one is willing or able to produce a logical definitive answer. I will now consider this to be a bug and would like to move and split this subject into two Bugs.
1)  Foobar2000 not handling Content Group as per rules on hydrogenaud.io
2)  Add a switch in to disable Foobar2000 from adding it's own proprietary prefix of  Foobar2000/  to WMA Tags and expand Foobar2000 to handle WMA tags as defined at hydrogenaud.io Tag Mapping.

Which raises the question, do I repost this in the bug section? Does an Admin move it for me? What now?

Thank you in advance
Tem

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #2
Mapping Content Group to WM/ContentGroupDescription has been added for the next update, thanks for pointing out as it was outright missing.

As for other fields & handling non-spec-defined fields without the foobar2000/ prefix, I'll consider it for some future update.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #3
Mapping Content Group to WM/ContentGroupDescription has been added for the next update, thanks for pointing out as it was outright missing.

As for other fields & handling non-spec-defined fields without the foobar2000/ prefix, I'll consider it for some future update.

That's wonderful! Thank you for looking in to that.

That is one file type down and 2 3 to go.

I believe it will help if I re-word my initial post:
Foobar2000 also does not map m4a, FLAC, ogg or ape tags correctly (according to a hex editor):

For iTunes MP4, (aac files in a m4a container) Foobar2000 writes Content Group erroneously to "name    CONTENT GROUP" rather than the correct field ©grp

For Vorbis Comment (FLAC, ogg files) Foobar2000 writes Content Group erroneously to "Content Group" rather than the correct field GROUPING

And I just checked a new one:
For APEv2 (ape files) Foobar2000 writes Content Group erroneously to "Content group" rather than the correct field Grouping

These field mappings are defined on hydrogenaud.io's Tag Mapping Page and have been in use by other players and editors for quite some time.

Again I am grateful that you are looking into this, and I hope this additional information helps.

Thank you in advance
Tem

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #4
Addressed all 3 cases (WMA, M4A, VorbisComment-based formats) in 1.4 beta 17, thanks for your patience.

As you've probably guessed I don't personally use this field, that's how it was working so badly to begin with. Please do post if you find any more issues with it.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #5
Addressed all 3 cases (WMA, M4A, VorbisComment-based formats) in 1.4 beta 17, thanks for your patience.

As you've probably guessed I don't personally use this field, that's how it was working so badly to begin with. Please do post if you find any more issues with it.
Using 1.4 beta 17, while CONTENT GROUP now writes to @grp for MP4 container, the result still shows as CONTENTGROUP in Properties. Is it possible that the result can also reside on the CONTENT GROUP property line too?

EDIT:
Found a work around: If you Cut contents of CONTENTGROUP and save, then paste into CONTENT GROUP, then the result stays put and does not move to CONTENTGROUP.
Surf's Up!
"Columnated Ruins Domino"

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #6
In Beta 17, the GROUPING metadata field is not addressed correctly, writing the information to the "CONTENT GROUP" field instead. Is this issue going to be addressed, or will I have to change my metadata structure from "GROUPING" to "CONTENT GROUP"?

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #7
Addressed all 3 cases (WMA, M4A, VorbisComment-based formats) in 1.4 beta 17, thanks for your patience.

As you've probably guessed I don't personally use this field, that's how it was working so badly to begin with. Please do post if you find any more issues with it.

Hello Admin,

Thanks again for your work on this.

I tested all file types mentioned on hydrogenaud.io's Tag Mapping Page for functionality with the beta release you directed me to (foobar2000 v1.4 beta 17), and all file types work except one: My .ape file with a APEv2 tag is still not mapped correctly in Foobar2000 v1.4 beta 17. Foobar2000 v1.4 beta 17 is still erroneously mapping APEv2 tags to Content Group rather than the correct field Grouping --although I've seen some software cut corners and map it to GROUPING. I don't know if these fields are case sensitive, but I imagine you would know about that.

I can only guess that Scaramouche is referring to ape files in his post (msg=958586).

Thanks again and have a great day!
Tem


Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #8
I always thought APEv2 tags were mapped just literally?

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #9
This tag mapping is confusing now in Beta 17.

With Advanced -> Tagging -> Vorbis & FLAC -> Compatible with old Foobar versions:-  Writing GROUPING into a FLAC, is read back as CONTENT GROUP. Writing to CONTENT GROUP then is written to CONTENT GROUP literally. Not possible to add a field named "Grouping". Not exactly compatible because the field Grouping is forcibly renamed on tag update. Better skip remapping entirely in this compatibility mode, or always use Grouping, as in the other mode.

With Advanced -> Tagging -> Vorbis & FLAC -> Compatible with various software:- Writing GROUPING into a FLAC, is read back as CONTENT GROUP. Writing to CONTENT GROUP is written to GROUPING. Effectively Content Group becomes a new alias to Grouping. This is fine.

In APEv2, no special mappings occur, and it is possible add and read both fields.

In my opinion new mappings defined today should be the same for both Vorbis and Ape, so that it is possible to use %whatever% on a mixed set of FLAC/TAK/WV/Vorbis/MPC files, and get a consistent result without $if(...). The linked table says that Ape and Vorbis should be the same for this field.

I don't personally use Grouping for genre/style. But I am discouraged to start using it now on a mixed collection.

 

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #10
I can confirm the behaviour described in the previous post for FLAC files (with metadata writing mode compatible to various software). Since I have used GROUPING throughout my music files for the main title of classical works (e.g. "Symphony No. 3 e-minor op. 34", "Piano Concerto No. 5") this field is quite essential for me.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #11
I always thought APEv2 tags were mapped just literally?

According to hydrogenaud.io's Tag Mapping Page -- short answer, no. If you would carefully read the page in the link I provided, it is clear.
Here are some remapping examples I spotted in APEv2 specifically:
Album Title Sort Order      >   ALBUMSORT
Disc / Set Subtitle         >   DsicSubtitle
Content Group            >   Grouping
Title Sort Order         >   TITLESORT

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #12
This tag mapping is confusing now in Beta 17.
If you will kindly follow the link I provided, hydrogenaud.io's Tag Mapping Page you would learn I'm not trying to change the standard; I am trying to bring foobar2000 up to standard.
These changes are not persional, or based on a singular opinion; I'm simply pointing out erroneous field mappings in foobar2000 based on  hydrogenaud.io's Tag Mapping Page.
In APEv2, no special mappings occur, and it is possible add and read both fields.
According to hydrogenaud.io's Tag Mapping Page -- special mappings do occur. If you would carefully read the page in the link I provided, it is clear.
Here are some remapping examples I spotted in APEv2 specifically:
Album Title Sort Order  > ALBUMSORT
Disc / Set Subtitle     > DsicSubtitle
Content Group           > Grouping
Title Sort Order        > TITLESORT
In my opinion new mappings defined today should be the same for both Vorbis and Ape
According to hydrogenaud.io's Tag Mapping Page These are not new mappings. Please read the page. There are differences established long before this thread, even if it's only a difference in capitalization.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #13
I interpret the first column "Name" in those tables as a human-readable description of the intent/purpose of the field, which could potentially be translated into another language without breaking interoperability (in Display -> Properties -> Standard Fields), and not that an automatic remapping should occur in software. After all, we do not use %Album Title%, %Track Title%, or %Disc / Set Subtitle% in title formatting scripts; we use %album%, %title% and %discsubtitle% instead. It follows that we should not have a superfluous mapping for this Content Group either, and use %grouping%.

Both Vorbis and ApeV2 contain literal Foobar field names with few old exceptions: Organization, Publisher, Date, Year, Track, Disc, TrackTotal, DiscTotal, Remixer. The fewer exceptions there are, the better. Ape and Vorbis columns are identical apart from capitalization.

Other formats have shorter 3 or 4 letter codes, which get expanded to Vorbis/Ape fields in Foobar. Therefore ©grp and WM/ContentGroupDescription should become %grouping% (Vorbis standard, as per the table). If this change is found to be disruptive to existing MP4/WMA collections, then at least Ape and Vorbis should be remapped to something else X, but the same for both formats.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #14
I interpret the first column...
+1 vote

Till today foobar wrote CONTENT GROUP and shows the same. In foobar I could not and can not see anywhere the word "GROUPING". Only today -- looking into the tags in another application, in Mp3tag. It is illogical.

CONTENT GROUP is important for me, too (symphonic, concerto, popular...). Now the well known tag system is crashed, and without any notification...

If I start to use in Vorbis tags, in FLAC files a new field "COMPOSERS PET'S NAME", and fill in  Display -> Properties -> Standard Fields "His dog=COMPOSERS PET'S NAME;", foobar shows me in properties "His dog". If I fill not the Standard Fields, foobar shows me "<COMPOSERS PET'S NAME>".

Now, if I start to use in Vorbis tags, in FLAC files a new field "GROUPING", and fill in  Display -> Properties -> Standard Fields "Content group=GROUPING;", foobar shows me in properties "Content group". If I fill not the Standard Fields, foobar shows me "<CONTENT GROUP>". Not "<GROUPING>". As wrote above: illogical.

IN GENERAL: will be very nice to meet in foobar an EXPLICIT remapping table, as in Mp3tag. The more, the better: customizable (as in Mp3tag, too).

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #15
MORE generally

Somebody wrote here: FLAC (or Vorbis?) "standards". Vorbis tags has no standards, only recommendations. Who's? Are they the team, who wrote the best music player application? No - Peter wrote it. Is GROUPING recommendation more logical, than CONTENT GROUP? No. This tag groups not anything. If I want to use groups of "pretty young blonde singer girls" and group of "old fat cats", this tag is not for this purposes -- it is about the MUSIC GROUPS = CONTENT GROUPS: symphonic, concerto, popular, and so on.

Are those recommendations so important? No. From 10 audiophils 8-9 uses foobar2000, and 1-2 was at minimum once on that page of Vorbis tags recommendations. For me foobar2000 is 5 time more is "A" standard, than that site.



Last: one of the best side of Vorbis tags is its freedom: I can use any tags, as I want, and must not think about TPOP or TSHIRT or ABOMB abbreviations. But, if we will not have the mentioned in the previous my post ability to customize the remapping table -- then really we have not this freedom.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #16
I didn't think this would spark so many emotional posts. I had a very specific response here; and then removed it. It is now clear to me that my attempting to smooth misunderstandings only serves to inflame emotions-- over what is supposed to be the simple correction of an error.

Whether it should be done or not is off topic-- the field was mapped erroneously, it's that simple.

Thank you Peter for your hard work. I congratulate your work and admire your ability to deal with people.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #17
I didn't think this would spark so many emotional posts.
Foobar is a brilliant multipurpose application. One of them is ordering, cataloging our music. Here are people with 100 or more thousands music files -- changing order to disorder of course is an important question.

Whether it should be done or not is off topic.
Why off? And where is on? I am sure, this is the best place to discuss.

the field was mapped erroneously, it's that simple.
No. The field was not mapped erroneously. I repeat: Vorbis comments has no standards. ONLY recommendations. My friend at next door has them too. My daughter has other ones, too. And what? Being only recommendations, and not any more -- our right and our task is to discuss about the expediency. You recommended not an error correction, as here (without standards) may not be any error -- you only recommended an illogical change. Peter (I hope, simply in hurry), unfortunately, accepted it. I am sure and know, not I am the only guy, who hopes in reverting of this change.

It is so simple. Really. :)

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #18
Is GROUPING recommendation more logical, than CONTENT GROUP? No. This tag groups not anything. If I want to use groups of "pretty young blonde singer girls" and group of "old fat cats", this tag is not for this purposes -- it is about the MUSIC GROUPS = CONTENT GROUPS: symphonic, concerto, popular, and so on.
This is reasonable. I'd agree to expand the abbreviated codes "grp" and "TIT1" to Content Group, and write it literally to Vorbis/Ape (as all fields). The term "grouping" is vague and ambiguous. Further confusion can be avoided by not creating a remapping, so that other players, old and current versions of Foobar show the same field name for all formats.

Neither Grouping, nor Content Group are mentioned in the standard Vorbis Specification or proposals linked on the Xiph page.

MusicBrainz recognizes "Grouping" for all formats in its mappings as used by a LastFMPlus plugin, but one can't refer to this page as the standard. HydrogenAudio wiki reflects de facto usage across various applications.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #19
By the way, there is another, nearly same case with PUBLISHER / ORGANIZATION. ORGANIZATION is much less informative (organizations may be any type -- for printing the cover, for cleaning streets near the CD shop, for maintan the producer's children) than PUBLISHER, who really published the music to public; and as the above, no one standard forces us to use the worse one. On the contrary, most of tagging systems uses the more logical and informative PUBLISHER name (TPUB, for example).

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #20
I repeat: Vorbis comments has no standards. ONLY recommendations. My friend at next door has them too. My daughter has other ones, too.

That does not make your say anywhere as authoritative as https://xiph.org/vorbis/doc/v-comment.html , from which I quote:
Individual 'vendors' may use non-standard field names within reason. The proper use of comment fields should be clear through context at this point. Abuse will be discouraged.
Mmmmmkay ... discouraging abuse. But that is "ONLY recommendations", eh? And so if you - or a friend or family member of yours - want to encourage abuse, then that is an equally good "recommendation"?

Nope. It makes your recommendation no better than [insert arbitrary user].
A more authoritative source would be current real-world practice, defaulting to the Xiph recommendations. Divergences are common - for example, many of us tag with release date and not recording date - and specifying recommendations as "recommendations" leaves room for letting de facto best practice overrule it.
“It sounded bad to me. Digital. They have digital. What is digital? And it’s very complicated, you have to be Albert Einstein to figure it out.”
- Donald Trump, May 2017

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #21
CONTENT GROUP is much more logical, than GROUPING. See above.
PUBLISHER is much more logical, than ORGANIZATION. See above.
Logical thinking is much more important, than anybody's recommendations. Illogical using of words IS abuse, not logical.
That is all, in my eyes.

And this is the end of discussion from me. All needed is written. Nobody's illogical speculations because of third party's recommendations simple are not interesting for me. I respect only logics. For me logical thinking is the only "authoritative". Respecting somebody's recommendations because of his "authoritativeness", instead of using your own brain and logics = the end of homo SAPIENS behavior.

"The proper use of human brain should be clear at this point. Abuse will be discouraged."
The citation from me. Only. Not from any third party guys.
If "current real-world practice" will "defaulting" to "2×2=5" -- sorry: for me it remains 4.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #22
Ah, someone who thinks they are Overlord Over The Laws Of Logic and who cannot even imagine that their own pet ideas could be anything less authoritative than simple arithmetic truths ...

And this is the end of discussion from me. All needed is written.

Please keep that promise.
“It sounded bad to me. Digital. They have digital. What is digital? And it’s very complicated, you have to be Albert Einstein to figure it out.”
- Donald Trump, May 2017

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #23
Interesting discussion. :))
I think that the only reason why Content group is included to wiki's page is because it was one of standard fields in id3/mp4/wma tags.
But when i see mappings (and specification at all) for id3 and/or mp4, it seems to me that people who invented this standards were taking heavy drugs.
APE tags and especially Vorbis comments give possibility to make tagging simple, intuitive and logical: you just write anything you want everywhere you want; you see everything exactly as you wrote it, in human-readable form.
But, no, we do not want simplicity; we want counter-logical, counter-intuitive, messy, human-unreadable standards.

Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error

Reply #24
The remapping of Publisher is one reason why I avoid using it in my collection, and prefer Label from MusicBrainz. But Organization is "standard" in the specification, while most other fields are not. Simple players like XMPlay or Winamp will still display Organization. Literal Publisher is encountered occasionally, with different contents, sometimes carrying a broad, unspecific rights holder name like "Sony" or "Universal", prepended with a random recent year. There are indeed several Companies involved in the production, manufacturing and distribution of a CD, while I am only concerned with the "imprint", brand or logo that categorises related music together.

I'm glad Foobar has customisable metadata display. There is absolutely no chance to convince other developers to change Publisher, Copyright or URL input boxes, even after hours spent arguing the case.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018