Agreed.
> The list could go on indefinitely. Perhaps this is the problem: there
> are just too many fields that someone might think are important for
> some particular use, but most people will think are excess baggage.
I think this will be nescessary, we should allow arbitrarily named fields,
but should set some (or perhaps quite a few) standard fields, or
reccomended field names such as track names and authors, none of which
need to be used.
Ian.