How should the year of an album be displayed?

[will]

For albums which have tracks in different years, the ML now displays the range of years that the album spans.

If there is an album with 3 tracks, the first track having year 1990, the second 1991 and the third 1992 then this album has a year range of 1990 to 1992.

If all years are from the same decade is displays the range as "1990-2"
If all years are from the same century, it displays the range as "1985-92".
If the years are from different centurys, it displays the range as "1995-2004"

screenshot example:


Is this the best way?

[edit: consider the case "2011-2" for 2011 to 2012]

[gaekwad2]

"1992-93", "1985-93" and "1999-2002"

"1992-3" looks weird imo

[will]

fair idea, added to the poll.

[Koopa]

Originally posted by gaekwad2
"1992-3" looks weird imo

I agree.

"1992-1993" is the format, which I would prefer

[Juanus]

Originally posted by gaekwad2
"1992-3" looks weird imo

Thirded. Have we learned nothing from Y2K? You have to go all 4 numeric values. 2003-2004

[jph6t]

Originally posted by will
[edit: consider the case "2011-2" for 2011 to 2012]

"1992-3" DOES looks weird. But even WEIRDER is the "2011-2" scenario
that will arise via the same approach in four years.

"1992-1993" is the best way to go.
100% consistency whether a difference of years, decades, or centuries.

I'm learning from Y2K

[niktheguru]

Gotta say i prefer the third one. I'm a brit too, so buckling the trend! ;-)

[will]

option 3 wins!

gaekwad2, you get a cookie for suggesting it

[jph6t]

I agree that option #3 is better than option #1 ...
but why have year ranges displayed in two different formats like it is in option #3?
Isn't option #2 the consistent approach?

I think it bad form to display something in one way on one line,
and in another way four lines later.

And if one makes the Year column wide enough to handle the largest format anyway (YYYY-YYYY), no real estate is gained by using the second format (YYYY-YY).

[Kiyouta]

It's the tyranny of the majority! First option is the only right one!

You'll regret this!

[zackbuffo]

Here comes the nit-picker: This option is totaly useless!

There are the following tag options:

1. the year information is related to the album, then the correct tag is the year of the album-release (even it's a compilation).

2. the year information is related to the song

a. the first relesase of the song was on a compilation, then the correct tag is the year of the compilation-release

b. the song was released on another album, before the compilation was released, then your album tag is wrong.

Assumed the tag should show the FIRST release of a song or album, there is no need for a display method of a range of years.

Don't take it too serieous, but that's how it is...

[jph6t]

Originally posted by zackbuffo
Here comes the nit-picker: This option is totaly useless!

There are the following tag options:

1. the year information is related to the album, then the correct tag is the year of the album-release (even it's a compilation).

2. the year information is related to the song

a. the original release of the song was on a compilation, then the correct tag is the year of the compilation-release

b. the song was released on another album, before the compilation was released, then your album tag is wrong.

Assumed the tag should show the FIRST release of a song or album, there is no need for a display method of a range of years.

Don't take it too serious, but that's how it is...

zackbuffo, your approach is 100% valid ...
And I applaud you for having a consistent method by which you tag your songs.
Too few users think this out before they start tagging.

BUT ... depending on what another user is trying to achieve,
they may take a different approach.

Say for example, a user wants the year info for the song (for reference sake),
but wants to be able to quickly tie songs together for playing or browsing ...
because they appeared on a mix, in a movie, or on compilation the user likes ...
or because all the songs were ripped from a greatest hits album the user owns ... then can achieve this by using the Year field as it relates to the Song
and the Album field as it relates to the unifying album/mix.

I realize this might not be the best approach if that user ends up sharing his MP3 with you. Given that you each use different methods for tagging, his tags would mess up your library. But then I would put preventing this upon you ... to screen the tags of new files before incorporating into your library ... ensuring not only the use of ID3v2 fields is based on your method, but also that the same naming conventions (abbreviations and capitalizations) are being used.

Basically, the alternative method of tagging I outlined provides a user with a work around to deliver functionality not available to them with your tagging method.

Note that you should NOT see year ranges in your ML as (if you tag with 100% accuracy based on your method) you will never have files sharing Album values that do not also share Year values.

Basically, the way this functionality was built ... if provides options*!
Allowing the end-user to customize their experience.
Which most always is a nice thing!

* Nice work will!
(Even if you do insist on displaying the year range in an inconsistent manner.
Go go option #2! )

[DJ Egg]

Don't forget things like "no album", 12", 7", CD-S, CD Single, etc, and different albums with the same name - all of which will have one entry in the Albums pane, but with different years - hence the need for the xxxx-xxxx year feature.

[jph6t]

Originally posted by DJ Egg
Don't forget things like "no album"...

Ah yes, thanks DJ Egg. Good point.

Originally posted by DJ Egg
12", 7", CD-S, CD Single, etc, and different albums with the same name - all of which will have one entry in the Albums pane, but with different years - hence the need for the xxxx-xxxx year feature.

Revisiting the tagging method discussion line above. For singles and such ...
I make the Album unique by populating the Album field with the name of the song
on the single and "[Single]" in brackets.

Example:

• Stone Temple Pilots Live & Acoustic version of "Plush"
  which was on the "Sex Type Thing" single
  
  Title = Plush [Live & Acoustic]
  Artist = Stone Temple Pilots
  Album = Sex Type Thing [Single]

Just a tip for all you 'taggers' out there. But as I outlined above, each person may have there own method based on their own needs.

Further note ... if the single in question is a foreign single I'll note that in the brakets. Thus "[Single]" alone implies the single is from my home country.
ex) Album = Song XYZ [Canada Single]

[DJ Egg]

Yeah, but when you've got ATF set to show Artist - Album - ## - Title, it annoys me to see the same for Album and Title. So for vinyl rips, for example, I just put 12" or 7" in the Album field, and especially if I only like one of the tracks/mixes.

[jph6t]

Originally posted by DJ Egg
Yeah, but when you've got ATF set to show Artist - Album - ## - Title, it annoys me to see the same for Album and Title. So for vinyl rips, for example, I just put 12" or 7" in the Album field, and especially if I only like one of the tracks/mixes.

A fair point. And yet again, as I outlined above, each person may have there own method based on their own needs.

[jph6t]

Winamp v5.34 includes the implementation of option #3.
Option #3 = "1992-93", "1985-93", & "1999-2002"

Thanks will and DEV team!

(#3 is better than #1, but still not #2. Go go option #2!)

[Koopa]

Don't worry, I prefer #2 too.

[MertcanKaya1991]

i was voted for #3 but it can be #2. because i was thinked that it can be short but i forgot that there is already 19xx-200x's. so i can't use a short year column. if we were in 20th century i prefer the #3 but now i prefer #2. but it can be stay like #3. can't you made an option to chose it in the preferences?

[jph6t]

Originally posted by MertcanKaya1991
can't you made an option to chose it in the preferences?

I have logged such a feature request in the wishlist here.