Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Capturing and Editing Video > New and alternative a/v containers

View Poll Results: Are you using tags in your MKV files already ?
No, i dont use tags, because i dont need them 10 13.51%
No, i dont use tags, because the apps to read/write them suck 29 39.19%
Yes, i use them, but only the very basic ones 29 39.19%
Yes, i use them, and many of them 6 8.11%
Voters: 74. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 24th December 2003, 22:48   #1  |  Link
ChristianHJW
Matroska Team
 
ChristianHJW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bavaria - Germany
Posts: 1,341
A new tagging standard for matroska ....

Hi guys,

we are in the process of redefining the tagging system in matroska, mainly because we believe nobody is actively using it. However, if we do so the old tags may become spec incompliant, depending on how we do it.

For this reason, here my question to you :

Are you using the tagging system in matroska currently ?
ChristianHJW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th December 2003, 00:15   #2  |  Link
ssjkakaroto
Registered User
 
ssjkakaroto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: River of Flame
Posts: 198
hey there christian, i voted in option 2 because i only use mmg (mkvtoolnix) to create mkv and mka files and tagging there needs a outside file (or is there a option i don't know?), vdubmod has a easy tagging system but i think it would be easier to do the muxing and tagging in one place
__________________
CCCP
ssjkakaroto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th December 2003, 05:19   #3  |  Link
gizmotech
Captain CommonSense!
 
gizmotech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 183
I'm gonna agree with #2. I use mmg to create my mkv files, and without a ready easy to use way of tagging the files I have no reason to do so.

As well, from what I understand there is no interface for players to read the tags anyways, which makes me wonder why I would goto the trouble of adding extra frivulous information. It might be different if I were doing professional work, but as a backup artist I really have no reason to go out of my way to create a tag file and add it to the encode.

Gizmo.
gizmotech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th December 2003, 11:50   #4  |  Link
tiki4
Registered User
 
tiki4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Who Knows?
Posts: 929
Well,

I voted for 2. The formulation is a little bit harsh, but I never saw the fun in using an external file to do some tagging. Actually I'd prefer a system for MKA that can be used like the APE2 tags of Musepack. For example through switches like '--title' (already there) at muxing stage in mkvmerge.

Cheers,

tiki4
tiki4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th December 2003, 15:22   #5  |  Link
ChristianHJW
Matroska Team
 
ChristianHJW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bavaria - Germany
Posts: 1,341
Who is the one vote that is using the tags i ask ? Can you briefly tell us what tags you were using, and for what purpose ? If we provide you with a tool to change old tags to new tags, could you use it on your files, IF we decided to make a new tagging system ?
ChristianHJW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th December 2003, 18:53   #6  |  Link
Latexxx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 618
I'm not the one but I'd like to see a tag editor similar to the foobar's default editor.
__________________
A/V moderator @ hydrogenaudio.org
My weird old sh*t: http://www.nic.fi/~lhahne/
http://last.fm/user/Latexxx/
Latexxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th December 2003, 21:20   #7  |  Link
Tuesday
Registered User
 
Tuesday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Corridor of Despair
Posts: 84
I voted #2, although it does sound rather harsh. I dont really need them desperatly so i'd only do so if it was an easy addition.

Maybe another suggestion for mosu's excellent mmg?
Tuesday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th December 2003, 00:31   #8  |  Link
outlyer
Hacker^WKludger
 
outlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Barcelona (Spain)
Posts: 155
I use as much tags as I can fullfill (and have patience to...), option #4 (nope, I'm not the one you asked for, Chris ) although it's more a #3.5.

I don't mind them being changed but making the old ones not spec-compliant seems to me a lot like anti-matroska; things should be easy to add/replace without breaking old specs. IMHO old tagging should be deprecated but not incompliant.

As for which ones I use... I wrote some crappy code to generate the XML file so I added them as needed out of the top of my head: multilegal, multicomments, multititle and encoder related.

Again I don't mind them being obsolete and not handled by any player, but don't like the idea of some older matroska feature becoming spec incompliant.
outlyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th December 2003, 01:52   #9  |  Link
BetaBoy
CoreCodec Founder
 
BetaBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,421
outlyer... we all agree on that point about being non-compliant. It is a trade-off... and the move would have to be done now before we get to 1.0.... on the positive side it would allow third party developers to adopt the tagging system without having to code 2000+ lines.
BetaBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th December 2003, 03:06   #10  |  Link
jcsston
Matroska Dev
 
jcsston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally posted by Latexxx
I'm not the one but I'd like to see a tag editor similar to the foobar's default editor.
One of the main features of the Matroska Shell Ext is complete tag editing.
It can also export XML tag files usable by mkvmerge, and can import AVI INFO tags and some MP3 ID3 tags.

Quote:
IMHO old tagging should be deprecated but not incompliant.
I am planning on adding a feature to the MSE to convert the old-style tags to the new tagging format, if there are enough people with already tagged files that they want updated.

Quote:
on the positive side it would allow third party developers to adopt the tagging system without having to code 2000+ lines.

Some stats from the MSE codebase
Tag User Interface 3300 lines
Tag Reading 1100
Tag Writing 700

With the fb2k plugin using the new tagging system.
UI N/A (fb2k handles this)
Reading 220
Writing 120
__________________
The Matroska Effect
jcsston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th December 2003, 10:45   #11  |  Link
Latexxx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 618
Quote:
Originally posted by jcsston
With the fb2k plugin using the new tagging system.
UI N/A (fb2k handles this)
Reading 220
Writing 120
Do you really got a fb2k plugin? When am I going to be able to mux whole album to one file with some error correction data and play it in foobar?
__________________
A/V moderator @ hydrogenaudio.org
My weird old sh*t: http://www.nic.fi/~lhahne/
http://last.fm/user/Latexxx/
Latexxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th December 2003, 10:45   #12  |  Link
ChristianHJW
Matroska Team
 
ChristianHJW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bavaria - Germany
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally posted by jcsston
Some stats from the MSE codebase
Tag User Interface 3300 lines
Tag Reading 1100
Tag Writing 700
With the fb2k plugin using the new tagging system.
UI N/A (fb2k handles this)
Reading 220
Writing 120
... seee guys, thats the problem. We fear nobody will implement the matroska tagging system into their 3rd party apps, because its too much work to fully support it .... but this means, if we want to make things easier for them, we have to drop the old system completely ....
ChristianHJW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th December 2003, 11:10   #13  |  Link
Atamido
Seņor Member
 
Atamido's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 915
Quote:
Originally posted by Latexxx
Do you really got a fb2k plugin? When am I going to be able to mux whole album to one file with some error correction data and play it in foobar?
Already done. I made an example file a few days ago that shows it off. Single MP3 stream using chapters to mark where the songs are.
Atamido is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th December 2003, 20:38   #14  |  Link
Asmodian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 2,472
I am currently using tags but not for anything important, I wouldn't mind if they were not shown using a new tagging system if the files were still playable. Third party support is much more important. (does this affect attachments? - I assume not...).

Thanks,
Asmodian
Asmodian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th December 2003, 22:43   #15  |  Link
unmei
frying subs
 
unmei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ch-2500
Posts: 891
nope, attachments are not related to tagging. Thus no fear, they are not lost.

I used some extended tags in a handful of encodes, but i don't mind if they are lost. Having to reencode the movie, on the other hand, were quite unlucky - given their playlength and a p3/600 encoding box
__________________
-nyo
unmei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2003, 04:52   #16  |  Link
mikeX
yakisoooobaaa!!
 
mikeX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Greece
Posts: 329
hi,
i can't say i have really been using the matroska container apart from a few file size comparisons with my previous container of preference, ogm.
the reason was mostly cause i hadn't looked into matroska deep enough, until recently that is, when i found out that
matroska is really cool! really great work there devs

as for the tags:

i really like them and would use as much as i could if it was a bit easier to use them and the players had better support for them,
hence i voted #2

breaking scec compliance is bad, but i think you have a pretty good reason for it and the side effects aren't really that important
+ if you should ever do such a thing, now is the time for it since matroska is still quite young
mikeX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2003, 07:48   #17  |  Link
Atamido
Seņor Member
 
Atamido's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 915
1. Any files that are already made will play fine. The tags do not affect playback.

2. The Matroska Shell Extension will likely automatically convert old tags to new ones, this would be quick as it would only have to rewrite a little data at the end of the file.

3. Attachments can now be tagged with the same system used to tag tracks and chapters.
Atamido is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th January 2004, 09:11   #18  |  Link
BlindWanderer
Brain Dead
 
BlindWanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 87
I currently i don't encode anything in matroska so you can ignore what i have to say, (nor have i looked at the tagging system) but...

I remember reading about using the chapter system in matroska audio container. I was wondering about how you would tag a file where the different chapters were different songs by different artists.

Some input plugins for popular media players (like winamp) where it would show each chapter/song in a matroska container as a separate track.

I would love to code something like this my self but i'm not really smart enough to do codec coding.
__________________
I'll sell my soul for a cabbit.
BlindWanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th January 2004, 12:48   #19  |  Link
robUx4
Matroska Team
 
robUx4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 421
It has nothing to do with codec coding. And yes, you can tag a chapter separately. So each part of a whole file can have its own description. It seems to be supported by the fooobar2000 player already (.mka support).
robUx4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th January 2004, 16:47   #20  |  Link
ChristianHJW
Matroska Team
 
ChristianHJW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bavaria - Germany
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally posted by BlindWanderer I currently i don't encode anything in matroska so you can ignore what i have to say, (nor have i looked at the tagging system) but...
.. just out of curiosity ( it killed the cat, as you know ) .. what are you using and why ?

Quote:
I remember reading about using the chapter system in matroska audio container. I was wondering about how you would tag a file where the different chapters were different songs by different artists.
... mmg ( the GUI for mkvmerge ) can convert CUE files from audio CDs into a XML matroska chapter file already, and this can be read into mkvmerge.exe ( the 'Global' tab in mmg ) so that every song gets its own chapter entry.

Quote:
Some input plugins for popular media players (like winamp) where it would show each chapter/song in a matroska container as a separate track.
... it seems we were doing a lot of effort here already, but in the wrong direction. The matroska splitter has a chapter interface already, but this is not supported by Windows Mediaplayer unfortunately, as we were of the opinion that there is no good chapter interface in DirectShow. Now, due to latest information, there is a nice chapter interface existing on DirectShow, and supported fine by WMP. Lets hope Gabest or Toff find the time to implement it into the splitter, so WMP can display matroska chapters.

Quote:
I would love to code something like this my self but i'm not really smart enough to do codec coding.
.... at least you can code, i cant ....
ChristianHJW is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:27.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.