ProppFrexx ONAIR User-Forum

Well, ruffly, the way I see it is something like that:

A Category is the result of one or more physical 'Container(s)' (Media Libraries) filtered by one or more rules (filter expression(s), tags, regex, etc..).

To me, the manager could have:

1) A list of 'containers' you can assign a label (very important as a path even a full one is not always very explicit). Think about a simple list view with at least 3/4 columns (label, path, items count, status). No need for a treeview here. Regarding the status I'm thinking about 'availability' of the container (an offline database or serveur, an unplugged external hard drive, ...)

2) A Treeview where you can create Categories exactly like a folder explorer. You could create, delete, drag & drop one inside another, etc... Only Categories with items count would be listed here, no need to 'see' what's 'inside', the names of the Categories should suffice and the all tree would give a good view of the all structure.

3) When you click on one Category in the treeview then you could have a third zone below or above the Treeview (or a popup?), with a list view of 'Containers' (the all list would be there with a check column, all checked by default) and another one of 'Rules' (like the expression builder for script lines) for this Category. (Actualy, unchecking a Container is part of the 'filtering' process).

By default, the 'root' Category would receive all Containers. If the user apply a Rule on it (including unchecking some Containers), then the children folders would receive only the content of the filtered result of their parent. Filtering would work in a hierarchical way.

(Then inside the script editor, there would be no point to have to chose between a Category or a Media Lib. Only Categories would appear there with clear, explicit and consistent names.)

This is just a ruff idea..

Cheers,
Guy.

Yes, that is true - ProppFrexx doesn't like equal folder names coming from the same physical hard disc (even if derived from different sub-folders).
I'll take a look, if I can eliminate that limit in the next version.

However, I was (re)thinking about your scenario. And I guess it might be easier to solve it this way:
- just use the main (root) folders are your folder based media library (e.g. '\Funk', '\Pop' whatsoever)
- this allows you to use this to query random track from it all
- if you need something more specific (e.g. you only want to query tracks from the 'easy' sub-folder you can simply use the 'Filter' option, e.g. use "Filename contains '\easy\'")
- in addition you might properly TAG your audio file and set the Genre, Mood, Grouping, Rating, Comment etc. accordingly
- this again allows you to use a resp. 'Filter' with your media libs

Isn't that the better option?

After a few days of extensive use of PFOA, I think I found what could be very simply added to answer the needs exposed in the previous messages.

First, I've decided to go full playlist Media Lib.

You are right, relying on playlists only is extremely powerful and flexible.
(the only concern I have with this is the synchronization of playlists and files but I may create a tool for this later on)

So, granted I'm now using only playlists, I can decide to create 'virtual categories' by simply creating specific playlists. Nothing new here, you even suggested it.
But remember what I wrote above: that a category could be seen as one or more containers filtered by one or more rules.

And the tool for this actually (almost) already exist in PFOA:
The Find Track window!

But this window needs 2 enhancements to be fully usable this way:
1) First, in the Media Library Selector, we would need to have multi-selections, not only all or one. Probably with a listview with check boxes.
2) Second, we would simply need to be able to save the all search results as a playlist (perhaps it's already possible but I don't see an option for this).

With this 2 enhancements, there is no need to modify the Media Library itself. Everything could be done/prepared from within the Find Track window.

Do you think this could be feasible ?

Cheers,
Guy.

Yes, that should be possible...I'll think about that!

Awesome. Thanks!

Cheers,
Guy.