> block title start end tracknu
> 1 5th sym 0:0 18:23 -
> 2 1st mov 0:0 7:10 1
> 3 2nd mov 7:10 10:05 2
> 4 3rd mov 10:05 15:03 3
> 5 4th mov 15:03 18:23 4
I can see that in some situations you might want to be able to represent
all five blocks you have there, but wouldn't it be more natural to
describe your block 1 as the sequence 2-3-4-5, rather than specifying it
again by time? Making the is-made-up-of relationship explicit lets you
deduce inherited attributes of the movements (like who played them)
which you would otherwise have to specify twice. It probably helps you
make sensible decisions about how to do shuffle play too, particularly
if there is more than one sort if is-made-up-of relationship (one
might imply strict order, another might just indicate a collection).
> block title start end tracknu
> 1 SOYCD 0:0 15:05 1
> 2 pt 1 0:0 7:50 -
> 3 pt 2 7:50 12:03 -
> 4 pt 3 12:03 15:05 -
> 5 WTTM 15:05 21:20 2
I can think of cases where this would be handy too. Again though, I
think it helps to have 2-3-4 filed under 1 so it is clear how they
join up.
The other case I mentioned in another post is where one ``block'' spans
more than one disk. This would need start and end to be specified
as D:H:M:S:F to uniquely index any point on any disk (D for disk-ID),
which fits easily in the nested scheme:
block title made of
1 MagicFlute sequence: [1.1, 1.2, 1.3]
1.1 Overture interval: [Disk123:00:00 - Disk123:07:20]
1.2 Act1 sequence: [1.2.1, 1.2.2, ...]
1.2.1 Aria interval: [Disk123:07:20 - Disk123:10:45]
1.2.2 Dialogue interval: [Disk123:10:45 - Disk123:11:80]
...
1.2 Act2 interval: [Disk234:00:00 - Disk234:12:03]
1.3 Act3 interval: [Disk456:00:03 - Disk456:15:05]
I don't know if you gain anything by listing the tracks in the above
structure since an alternate view of the same three disks would be:
block title made of
2 MF,disk1 sequence: [2.1, 2.2, 2.3...]
2.1 Track1 interval: [Disk123:00:00 - Disk123:07:20]
2.2 Track2 interval: [Disk123:07:20 - Disk123:10:45]
2.3 Track3 interval: [Disk123:10:45 - Disk123:11:80]
...
3 MF,disk2 sequence: [3.1, 3.2, 3.3...]
3.1 Track1 interval: [Disk234:00:00 - Disk234:12:03]
...
It's easy to take a time position and display it both as a semantically
meaningful hierarchic label from the first table (MagicFlute/Act1/Aria),
and as a CD-mindset label from the second (MF,disk1/Track2).
Robin.
-- R.M.O'Leary <robin nospam at acm.org> +44 7010 7070 44, PO Box 20, Swansea SA2 8YB, UK