R15 Bug - In ID-tag, Publisher field is mislabelled "LABEL"

[chrisjj]

See http://i.imgur.com/HpGxGLm.png .

PS This Forum's "Insert Image" is failing here on latest Chrome.

[BrodyBoy]

See http://i.imgur.com/HpGxGLm.png .

PS This Forum's "Insert Image" is failing here on latest Chrome.

Different names for some tags is an annoyance, but not a bug. Different tagging schemes tend to have a few variances like this.....dBp applies the tags appropriate to the format in use.

If you look closely at your image, you'll see other differences as well. DISC/DISCMUBER, ALBUM ARTIST/ALBUMARTIST.....same as LABEL/PUBLISHER. Just the variances of different tagging systems.

[chrisjj]

dBp applies the tags appropriate to the format in use.

There's nothing appropriate about displaying PUBLISHER as LABEL in this format. In this format, WMA, the item is explicitly named PUBLISHER. See the official documentation here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...(v=vs.85).aspx

If you look closely at your image, you'll see other differences as well. DISC/DISCMUBER, ALBUM ARTIST/ALBUMARTIST

I have less of a problem with those minor differences since clearly the variants have the same meaning.

.....same as LABEL/PUBLISHER.

Not the same at all. LABEL and PUBLISHER have different meanings.

And they may both may genuinely exist in the file. Whereupon dBpa's mistaking of PUBLISHER for LABEL leads its display to merge the values into a single line labelled LABEL: http://i.imgur.com/MDm8xBL.png . And conversion of this WMA to another WMA merges the two values into a single field separated by a control code, 0D http://i.imgur.com/Dt9pB61.png. This single fields is again named PUBLISHER (in the file and other programs), but again dBpa's display mislabels it LABEL.

[BrodyBoy]

Ah, my bad Chris. I (mis)interpreted your original image to represent tagging changes after a codec conversion. But in fact, you're not referring to any dBp conversion at all....right?

[d2b]

In what context are you using "publisher?" In the music industry, there are those that publish songs and others that publish albums. In the context of releasing recordings, publishers of music generally refers to the label or artist/band that publishes a CD, just like a company like McGraw-Hill publishes books for authors. For denoting the organization that is responsible for releasing an album or set of recordings, the terrms Publisher, Label and Organization often appear and are meant to denote the same thing.

Ideally any media player or library database manager should be able to map any one of those terms to a user's preferred variant as a "preferences" option. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. Some options in dBp allow this, although the options are limited. For example, it is possible to configure dBp to map ORGANIZATION to LABEL when ripping CDs to FLAC.

You can also use an application like mp3tag to map the tag names to whatever you want.

"d2b"

[chrisjj]

Ah, my bad Chris.

No problem, BB. Thanks for taking an interest.

I (mis)interpreted your original image to represent tagging changes after a codec conversion. But in fact, you're not referring to any dBp conversion at all....right?

Correct. I'm referring simply to dBpa's ID-tag display. However as you can see from my further info, there is a related problem in conversion that doesn't even change the format.

[chrisjj]

In what context are you using "publisher?"

"The WM/Publisher attribute contains the name of the company that published the content." That's from the official documentation I cited: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...(v=vs.85).aspx

the terrms Publisher, Label and Organization often appear and are meant to denote the same thing.

They may denote different things, and WMA allows them as three separate attributes with different values.

Ideally any media player or library database manager should be able to map any one of those terms to a user's preferred variant as a "preferences" option.

My media player or library database manager does allow that. But I don't need such a mapping because I don't need a user's variant. I'm using the attribute as defined. And no mapping or variant in such a program will solve the problem that dBpa is mislabelling the attribute in existing files.

You can also use an application like mp3tag to map the tag names to whatever you want.

Mp3tag's tag field mapping affects the display in the Mp3tag only. Not in dbPa. And the tag field name is already the one I want. And I do not want to use Mp3tag to transfer the attribute value to a different field just to match dBPa's mislabelling. I want dBpa to be accurate, so that I can use it to inspect the actual data in the file.

PS The same issue is present in Edit ID-tag: http://i.imgur.com/40QH3yy.png

[Spoon]

Noted

[chrisjj]

Thanks Spoon. And thanks again for a great program.

[Spoon]

Now fixed in R9

[chrisjj]

now fixed in r9

r9??

[Spoon]

The R9 release of the wma codec.

[chrisjj]

The R9 release of the wma codec.

Ah, thanks. So in the WMA codec R9, the Publisher field is labelled "Publisher"?

[chrisjj]

Now fixed in R9

Verified http://i.imgur.com/GTCdkWe.png

Excellent! Thanks!