On 03.02.2015, at 01:26, Lou Logan <l...@lrcd.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 2, 2015, at 03:10 PM, Reimar Döffinger wrote: >> I'm not really convinced this makes sense. >> There are thousands of programs that can edit IDv3 tags, but >> comparatively few that can handle vorbis tags. >> If both exist, why should the Vorbis tags be more likely to >> be correct? >> The warnings I sure agree with though. > > From http://xiph.org/flac/faq.html#general__tagging > What kinds of tags does FLAC support? > > FLAC has it's own native tagging system which is identical to that of > Vorbis. They are called alternately "FLAC tags" and "Vorbis comments". > It is the only tagging system required and guaranteed to be supported by > FLAC implementations. > > Out of convenience, the reference decoder knows how to skip ID3 tags so > that they don't interfere with decoding. But you should not expect any > tags beside FLAC tags to be supported in applications; some > implementations may not even be able to decode a FLAC file with ID3 > tags.
Yes, and? Point one: ID3 won, it is generally supported. Insisting on something else IMHO is just being a pain on the user for little reason and nothing we should strive to emulate. Point two: If despite that warning a ID3 tag exists, it seems sensible to assume it does so for a good reason and shouldn't be ignored. If it contains wrong information it should be removed, and that is relatively easy to do. I suspect removing FLAC tags isn't as easy in case things are broken the other way round. I don't really care much, but ignoring an ID3 tag to me seems like the solution with much lower usability. But if you feel strongly otherwise feel free to ignore my comments. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
