Plone4ArtistsAudio 1.1 (Beta release)
Document Actions
#4 — Make other fields searchable
| State | Resolved |
|---|---|
| Version: |
—
|
| Area | User interface |
| Issue type | Feature |
| Severity | Medium |
| Submitted by | Nate Aune |
| Submitted on | 2006-08-28 |
| Responsible | Rocky Burt |
| Target release: |
—
|
Last modified on
2007-10-13
by
Rocky Burt
The other fields should be indexed in the catalog so they are searchable:
title, artist, album: SearchableText
genre: FieldIndex (this one needs special handling since what's actually stored is a UID which corresponds to a genre name)
title, artist, album: SearchableText
genre: FieldIndex (this one needs special handling since what's actually stored is a UID which corresponds to a genre name)
Added by
Rocky Burt
on
2006-11-09 07:11 PM
Issue state:
unconfirmed → open
As an alternative to adding new indexes to the catalog or handling SearchableText, the description now gets updated with all of the standard audio fields so they become searchable. Is this something that could work? Please test the current p4a.audio code to see it in action.
Added by
Nate Aune
on
2006-11-09 07:11 PM
I hadn't thought of doing it like this. It seems kinda hackish to me - like a misuse of the description field. But I guess it's not unlike the auto-summarize feature of Haystack. You are summarizing the content of the MP3 file by using it's metadata.
I think that some users may want to provide a narrative description of the MP3 file. For example a podcast episode, you may want to have a short summary of what you might find in that episode, and a richtext description of the contents of the podcast.
It seems as though once you mark an ATFile as being an audio file, you lose the normal edit form fields (description, related items, enable discussion, etc.)
Does this mean that if someone creates their own content type with additional fields and a FileField and wants to make it an audio file, that these additional fields are no longer exposed on the Edit form?
Perhaps the ID3 metadata should go on it's own 'Metadata' tab and leave the Edit form as is.
I think that some users may want to provide a narrative description of the MP3 file. For example a podcast episode, you may want to have a short summary of what you might find in that episode, and a richtext description of the contents of the podcast.
It seems as though once you mark an ATFile as being an audio file, you lose the normal edit form fields (description, related items, enable discussion, etc.)
Does this mean that if someone creates their own content type with additional fields and a FileField and wants to make it an audio file, that these additional fields are no longer exposed on the Edit form?
Perhaps the ID3 metadata should go on it's own 'Metadata' tab and leave the Edit form as is.
Added by
Rocky Burt
on
2006-11-05 07:57 AM
Issue state:
unconfirmed → open
Added by
(anonymous)
on
2007-03-23 03:11 PM
This is a very bad idea. You should undo that and find a better solution.
When you view a folder listing with audio files you see this description information. It looks very bad and unprofessional.
When you view a folder listing with audio files you see this description information. It looks very bad and unprofessional.
Added by
Rocky Burt
on
2007-10-13 10:55 AM
Issue state:
open → resolved
What ended up happening was we added new catalog indexes for this.