| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
apd
Junior Member
Greece
378 Posts |
 Posted - 19 May 2009 : 10:18:44
|
While sorting by length the entries appear by absolute numerical value. Entries with values 1 to 19 (minutes) are followed by entries 100 to 199. I think XMM should be able to sort the entries acknowledging the TIME value.
As an addition, I think that it would be nice to be able to create groups (i.e. up to 30 min, 31-60, etc). |
|
|
JDommi
Administrator
Germany
4657 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 10:41:10
|
Hi apd,
I think groups are not good for that. Best way could be to expand the minutes with 0 like 001.
Could be easily done in script or by Ale in XMM itself.
JDommi |
In order to achieve what is possible, you have to try the impossible over and over again.
Hermann Hesse |
 |
|
|
apd
Junior Member
Greece
378 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 15:34:58
|
| I meant groups by duration inside XMM, to group short films. But anyway, the important thing is to have the correct sorting - XMM should "imagine" the 00 in a 1 min film ot the 0 in a 59 min film. |
|
|
|
kencr
New Member
United Kingdom
69 Posts |
Posted - 21 May 2009 : 13:00:59
|
I think the problem lies in how the length of a film is expressed, and how the database treats it. Most of the films I've seen give the number of minutes a film lasts, followed by " min". This is a text value, and so it's sorted differently than it would be if it was just a number, without the " min" at the end.
If the time were expressed as a number, i.e. the number of minutes, there wouldn't be a problem. If the movie is downloaded using a script, it all depends on how the particular film database you download it from holds the information.
For example, suppose a film is 59 min long, some databases (e.g. IMDB) show the length as "59 min", others as just 59.
It should be possible to write a script which strips the " min" away, then turn the remaining text into a number, which would make the values consistent, regardless of which film database you download it from. |
Ken Crosbie |
|
|
|
JDommi
Administrator
Germany
4657 Posts |
Posted - 21 May 2009 : 18:17:24
|
You're right, Ken. And of course to make it more difficult: some sites show 2 different times; With and without credits.
As example: 83:53 Min. (78:45 Min. o.A.).
For that it would be a good idea to take 2 fields for length: 1 for normal display and another (only first numerical part) for sorting, overall time or anything like that.
Well, quite easy to handle but is that really worthwhile? |
In order to achieve what is possible, you have to try the impossible over and over again.
Hermann Hesse |
|
|
|
apd
Junior Member
Greece
378 Posts |
Posted - 22 May 2009 : 10:10:19
|
The "is it worth it" question is subjective - and it applies to many aspects of XMM. For me the answer is yes, because, for one it allows me to distinguish at once between short and long films in a list. If it was
implemented, it could be used in the "exclusion" filters - like "show all films by Z, except shorter than 40 min".
And anyway, if it's easy, why not have it available? :) |
|
|
|
JDommi
Administrator
Germany
4657 Posts |
Posted - 22 May 2009 : 10:30:17
|
Sorry, apd ;)
Of course, if someone wants to use it - it's worth it. I only thought of the duplicate fields for this function that in most cases would be identical. But maybe Ale has a good idea to prevent two fields without cutting additional info like the second time without the credits...
|
In order to achieve what is possible, you have to try the impossible over and over again.
Hermann Hesse |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
new bug