Sorry Morri, MT doesn't usually get that many opportunities to hang shit on me for my spelling, so pretending something was a typo is the closest he can get.

As for the lengths, just run a check for a small resolution, and if it's too small (read: 1024x768, the new 640x480), simply clip a few words from the tabs:

"Related Links" => "Links"
"Additional Notes" => "Notes"

I've posted the fix in the bug tracker.

Is using asterisks really encouraged? Imho it looks rather confusing. The asterisks are in no way part of the track's title.

And this list in additional notes:


Rather hard to read too. "Let's see... This has one asterisk... This has two. This has three. What does three mean again?"

Imho a lot better way to do it is to insert something like this in additional notes:



Or maybe use the track titles instead of numbers if the tracklist order differs a lot between versions.

Imho where the tracks come from should have nothing to do with the track list - it's completely an additional notes thing.

My 3 dents.

I agree with RonimuZ.

OMG, UR DOIN' IT RONG!

Seriously, asterisks? Don't get me started; they shouldn't be being used in the first place. Better to explicitly specify the tracks in the additional notes (either by number or title... either is easier than trying to mix-and-match )

In tzhe previous software version it was a nice way of handling such complex stuff; see also the additional notes with the second tracklist. Everything could be handled in a nice and simple way.

The new one prohibites this.... and it looks therefore a bit strange.


But you have two versions ... I have seen releases with five or more versions ... it becomes tricky.

Look at this one (also done by me)
http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/The_True_Endless/The_Early_Days_of_Armageddon/148987

The track list is complicated, the line-ups are complicated and you can see the short-comings of the current software. Discogs has solved it better.

edit:
Take a look at this release:
http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Distortum/Olvidado/313452
This is just a small demo release with a rather small line-up, but the guest musician aspect is simply too far away from the track list and it is therefore confuding to look at.

Well, I still pretty much completely disagree about what is nice and what is simple.



So... One of the lineups there is:


Instead of that I'd put it this way:


In my opinion it's clearer to read numeric ranges than match up sets of asterisks. With the current lineup system it can look rather simple, too.




I don't think it's too confusing to look at, as long as you check what track is what. Using track titles instead of track numbers, like ' (on "Acelerado")', is more straightforward (ie., less checking the track number) but can get messy with long track titles, etc.

Regardless of where the guest musician aspect can be viewed, the lineup is imho the only logical place for that information. The track list tab shows track information and the lineup tabs shows who participated in the making of the release. Would you rather have the songs listed like "Acelerado (feat. Facundo Coria)"? The asterisk/additional notes thing is as troublesome in this case as it.

I think showing the lineup at the same time with the track list is something worth considering, but my point here is that the asterisk way is more messy than using track numbers. I haven't changed my mind after seeing your examples.


[edit:] Since the system also stores unique track ids it could be possible to link an artist to a specific track on the album. That'd be quite heavy, though, which is probably why it hasn't been implemented. Linking artist to a specific release and adding applicable tracks to the role (aka the "on track x" system) is accurate enough... And again, imho clearer than the asterisk system.

should this be added to the line-up?

http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/The_Prior%27s_Diary/Harlekin/13903#album_tabs_lineup

Hey guys,

Here's a trick that might help some of you clearing lengthier legacy line-ups (such as when double-checking members with a huge list of roles):

http://artofalhadis.com/labs/editableLegacy.php

When you open that page, drag and drop the big button into the toolbar (or right click and bookmark it from the context menu, depending on your browser or preference). That'll create a bookmarklet you can use to make the text of a legacy line-up interactive and editable. Simply click it when you're editing a band's line-up and you should be able to click and type inside the old line-up as easily as you would an ordinary text box.

Only bothered testing on Firefox.

Works in Chrome as well. Nice, thanks.

I don't get the use of that...?

Well, when you're coming through a huge line-up checking that all the links have been added before hitting that sexy little "Clear" button... it can come in handy to be able to selectively delete lines from the legacy field that've been checked.

Otherwise, it might be easy to lose your place... at least, that's just me.

Nice trick!

Anyone else having trouble clicking on the "read more" button? None of those on any main band page expand anymore.

Works for me...

Wow, this sucks, and it has only been a recent problem. Running Wild's page? Can't extend the additional info at the top. No other band page differs. Great. Every other link seems to work fine.

Running Wild's notes load for me in Chrome and Firefox 6.

Yes I have the latest version of firefox that I only use. I'm not using internet explorer. Like I said, this has only been a very recent problem, and obviously it is on my end. Thanks for the confirmation that's it's working for you.

http://www.metal-archives.com/images/2/1/5/2/215216.jpg

Just out of curiosity, how the hell was somebody able to upload that image when it's past the 50 KBs limit for album covers? >_>;

Hmm, that was uploaded during v1, so who knows what bug someone encountered...

If it's any help, that image has about 25 KBs of useless metadata in it that dropped the filesize to an acceptable level once it was ripped out...

Last Modified: Thursday, 30 October 2008 6:04:21 PM

Yeah, probably way too long ago for it to matter now. XD

Here's another example:
http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Ni ... lay/157525
Image file size is 90KB even!

I have the same problem, actually. Firefox 3.5.15 on Fedora. No problems with other JavaScript functionality though.

The error log says "Console not defined" on line 349 in common.js. Looks like that line of code is actually part of the function which which is used to pop up additional notes so it might be related. Weird though that it doesn't apply to every Firefox?

NOW we're talking.

Okay, this one's easy: Just change that line to this:
if(console)) console.log(dialogId);

Oh gods, the bug happens because I accidentally left a line of debugging code in there? And some noobs use antiquated browsers without a javascript console??

RonimuZ, FYI, are you aware that you are about 3 versions behind for Firefox?

Yes. It's just that updating it is a pain in the ass because that may also mean updating XULRunner, and updating XULRunner can break other software (and vice versa). I use Chromium too though, and will one day reinstall fresh OS, which should solve everything for a while.

Also my other computer has Firefox 5.

But anyway, it works now even on this antiquated browser from last year. Thanks!

As a quick suggestion, can we please have the ability to add album lineups for non-metal bands on splits in the future? I can understand if they don't get their own artist page, but it would give us the opportunity to clear a lot of crap out of the Additional notes field.

Think they're already working on that. They probably have it pegged onto the "Allow artists to be added to more than one band per split" issue too.

Bringing this back up. I'm eager to narrow my search down to vocalists with ovaries who have played in a brutal death metal band.

Minor issue: In the "Live musicians" tab, if you put a member's time range as, for example, "1999-[blank]" it still reads "(1999-present)" on the band page even if the "still active?" box isn't checked. Normally it would read "(1999-?)".

Weird, the Reports tab seems to be staying open, even after the last report to be submitted was closed:

http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Cancerbero/39034

Will you PLEASE modify the date shown for a band in the queue to the time of the submission of the band to the queue and not to the time of it addition to the user's draft? I personally got this problem at least 10 times for now, every time I add a band out of nowhere another submission for the same band pop out before my submission.

And it's very useful if the search could be extended to cover the bands in the queue.

I suppose most of the users don't have these problems since they don't submit much bands and the moderators could directly add the band to the archives but please take into consideration that this is REALLY extremely important for users who regularly submit bands.

Strange, there were a few open (unassigned) orphan reports (i.e. without any comments attached to them) in the database... not sure how it happened, but I've cleared them.



A search for the queue is planned (though really, ctrl + f isn't that hard....?), but I'm not sure what the problem is regarding draft bands. Do you mean that you add bandX to your drafts on, say, Sept. 1st, submit to queue on Sept 6th, but it shows Sept 1st in the queue? And so that if someone added the same band to his drafts on August 12th but submitted on Sept 8th, and the mods will use his submission instead of yours? I guess it can be frustrating, I'll see if I can adjust the timestamps...

Ctrl + f isn't that hard but a search is easier if there is 300 band. Regarding the draft bands, yes it's completely what you just said. It's frustrating because adding a band will take several minutes between adding the info to MA and searching for other info on the net and later the moderator will use the info you added to complete another submission that popped out before your submission 2 or 3 days later and sometimes the other submission has extremely basic info and even a release isn't mentioned. I don't know if you noticed the ICS Vortex case but that was really funny. I am quite sure that wednesdead666 asked those questions here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=64985&start=3680 because of this case.

Heh, I knew that was bound to get mentioned. There were eight different submissions of that band in the queue at the time. I compared them all and tried to be fair, but I knew that no matter which submission I chose, in the end someone would start bitching. I agree that your proposed change to the submission system would make things a bit clearer. And more sense. I find it irritating/confusing myself.

Maybe we could check the submission queue when submitting a draft to see if a band with the same name and country's already been submitted? It wouldn't stop the submission from going through, but it could prompt the user with an "Are you sure...?" notice.

That might be enough to make some lazy users give up if they're submitting half-hearted band drafts. XD

http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Ra ... One/150071

Using the newest version of Chrome (can't test to reproduce results in Firefox because it's screwy on my computer, sorry), the track length and "show lyrics" text are pulled towards the center of the box, when they should be pushed over to the right.

^ They should be what now?

Do you mean that if you click "Show lyrics", the track length and the changed text "Hide lyrics" are at different spot than before clicking? That seems to happen because the lyrics are too wide. Happens also, for example, here with "The Prisoner".

That's not what I'm talking about. Look at this.

Okay. Seems to behave same way on my Firefox/Iron.

I've noticed though, that track length and "Show lyrics" positions always depend on the length of the track titles. Compare any two albums (with different track title lengths) by opening them in two tabs and switching back and forth.