(and someday I will learn how to spell that word).
2009-10-01 27413, 2009
Muz
That, or get an IRC client with spellchecking and English dictionary. :p
2009-10-01 27402, 2009
warp
i don't like spellcheckers
2009-10-01 27442, 2009
warp
I always feel I should be able to know the languages I use, and not need computers to help me.
2009-10-01 27422, 2009
warp
(except my native language, I don't know that very well at all, which is a somewhat interesting situation)
2009-10-01 27408, 2009
nikki
you can always ignore the angry red line though
2009-10-01 27433, 2009
warp
sure
2009-10-01 27428, 2009
nikki
and you don't even need to use the thing that offers suggestions...
2009-10-01 27456, 2009
brian joined the channel
2009-10-01 27428, 2009
ijabz
luks, cycles I just ran through the releasegroup example http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Next_Generation_Schem… expecting the release group to link to two different artists, (portishead and massive attack) via the artist credit table but it just links to one artist called 'Portishead & Massive Attack' , I don't get what artist credit is providing
I think it's because the hard search limit varies as you change the offset
2009-10-01 27431, 2009
luks
yes, it's intentional
2009-10-01 27421, 2009
luks
I did this to keep it fast enough even for queries with too many results
2009-10-01 27415, 2009
aCiD2
Hrm, then we're going to need something different for the lookup search then I think
2009-10-01 27434, 2009
aCiD2
Also, it makes the pagination completely useless, even on the main search results
2009-10-01 27406, 2009
luks
I disagree that it's completely useless
2009-10-01 27410, 2009
aCiD2
ok
2009-10-01 27413, 2009
aCiD2
not completely
2009-10-01 27415, 2009
luks
what you need most of the time is on the first few pages
2009-10-01 27432, 2009
luks
and as you look through them, new search results are appearing
2009-10-01 27400, 2009
luks
if you get 10 pages, you will almost never go straight to the 7th (for example)
2009-10-01 27406, 2009
aCiD2
right
2009-10-01 27418, 2009
luks
because you can't possibly guess that your results is there
2009-10-01 27443, 2009
nikki
it would be better if it said "found over x results" then...
2009-10-01 27400, 2009
aCiD2
what about the lookup control? As the limit is about 10 results per page the chance of needing to go through pages is more likely
2009-10-01 27408, 2009
aCiD2
Could we use a minimum hard limit of 100?
2009-10-01 27442, 2009
luks
I don't really see the problem, honestly
2009-10-01 27422, 2009
aCiD2
I guess the only time I hit a problem was when searching for something like "Smith" and by the time you get to page 10, clicking next page doesn't seem to do anything at all
2009-10-01 27419, 2009
aCiD2
but for smaller searches it doesn't matter, so I could leave it
2009-10-01 27405, 2009
aCiD2
it seems to behave fine for "Warner" as a label search too, which is probably as extreme as it would get
2009-10-01 27433, 2009
luks
I mean, what is the result that you want to get?
2009-10-01 27445, 2009
nikki
if the number of results is going to change, can we get rid of the ">>" link and the "n pages" bit?
2009-10-01 27446, 2009
luks
$hard_search_limit += $limit * 3;
2009-10-01 27401, 2009
luks
this code makes sure that there are always at least three page visible
2009-10-01 27412, 2009
luks
do you want to increase this?
2009-10-01 27402, 2009
luks
nikki: I think it's unclear yet how will we use the psql search yet
2009-10-01 27407, 2009
nikki
ok
2009-10-01 27419, 2009
luks
but yes, that link and "n pages" doesn't make sense there
2009-10-01 27432, 2009
luks
it was just easier to re-use the existing system
2009-10-01 27437, 2009
nikki nods
2009-10-01 27442, 2009
aCiD2
I was just thrown when I searched for "records" in the label search and the pagination started to break when I got to "L"
2009-10-01 27416, 2009
nikki
I don't see a problem with the behaviour though, google works fine for me without saying exactly how many pages of results there are
2009-10-01 27423, 2009
aCiD2
it's not the count
2009-10-01 27429, 2009
nikki
hmm
2009-10-01 27433, 2009
aCiD2
by the time I got to "L" i couldn't seem to actually get past L
2009-10-01 27435, 2009
nikki
ok
2009-10-01 27402, 2009
aCiD2
but for small searches it's fine
2009-10-01 27420, 2009
aCiD2
I just imagined someone complaining about just this when we go for testing, but if it's expected behaviour, then we can leave it as is
2009-10-01 27444, 2009
nikki
is it the same on test? 'cause it works for me there o_O
2009-10-01 27404, 2009
nikki
oh, wait
2009-10-01 27409, 2009
luks
it's not expected if the UI shows the number as the total count of matching result
2009-10-01 27414, 2009
luks
but it should not do that
2009-10-01 27429, 2009
luks
it doesn't matter much for artists or labels
2009-10-01 27429, 2009
nikki
I got to R and it started adding in results starting with B to M
2009-10-01 27439, 2009
aCiD2
yea, that sounds similar to what I got
2009-10-01 27445, 2009
luks
but if you search for recording containing 'the', it helps a lot
2009-10-01 27456, 2009
luks
(don't try it with the current direct search on the main server :))
2009-10-01 27401, 2009
aCiD2
heh
2009-10-01 27404, 2009
nikki
hmm... it was only that page that I saw though, the rest were fine, but once I got to Z, it started from A again
2009-10-01 27436, 2009
luks
I'm not sure I understand it, where are you seeing it?
2009-10-01 27455, 2009
luks
if you are seeing inconsistency in the results, it's because of $fuzzy_search_limit option
2009-10-01 27435, 2009
luks
I thought 10000 is high enough for any search
2009-10-01 27402, 2009
nikki
oh, duuuh... they're in the middle of R because people stupidly used "Records, Whatever" as the sortname for "Whatever Records"
2009-10-01 27412, 2009
nikki
and it started repeating itself or something after something silly like 150 pages
2009-10-01 27425, 2009
nikki
but of course, nobody would seriously be checking 150 pages...
2009-10-01 27454, 2009
aCiD2 nods
2009-10-01 27457, 2009
aCiD2
ok, we'll leave that
2009-10-01 27429, 2009
aCiD2
other question -- any one know how to test if a string is written using the latin alphabet?
2009-10-01 27435, 2009
nikki
in perl?
2009-10-01 27448, 2009
aCiD2
JavaScript
2009-10-01 27449, 2009
luks
where do you need it?
2009-10-01 27401, 2009
nikki
yuck
2009-10-01 27409, 2009
aCiD2
People mentioned only showing the sort name if the first name is not latin
2009-10-01 27410, 2009
nikki
brian had some horrible regex for it
2009-10-01 27414, 2009
aCiD2
yea
2009-10-01 27418, 2009
aCiD2
i don't wanna bring that library in
2009-10-01 27436, 2009
nikki
see, in perl you'd just need something involving \p{Latin} :/
2009-10-01 27444, 2009
aCiD2
heh
2009-10-01 27451, 2009
luks
you can make the server to return you the info
2009-10-01 27400, 2009
aCiD2
good point!
2009-10-01 27411, 2009
aCiD2
nikki: so how'd I do it in Perl :)
2009-10-01 27459, 2009
luks
I'm not sure if it makes sense to decide whether or not to show the sort name based on this
2009-10-01 27432, 2009
aCiD2
at the moment I just always show the sort name
2009-10-01 27418, 2009
nikki
I would probably use /^[\p{Latin}\p{ASCII}\p{Common}\p{Inherited}]+$/ which would match anything which only contains ascii, latin or symbols
2009-10-01 27405, 2009
nikki
hmm... I don't think \p{ASCII} is needed, all the useful characters would be covered by the other ones...
2009-10-01 27420, 2009
aCiD2
Cool, works a treat
2009-10-01 27401, 2009
outsidecontext joined the channel
2009-10-01 27445, 2009
warp
brian: ping?
2009-10-01 27456, 2009
warp
hm, that didn't really need a question mark.
2009-10-01 27432, 2009
outsidecontext
luks: do you have a second?
2009-10-01 27402, 2009
Muz joined the channel
2009-10-01 27447, 2009
jacckk joined the channel
2009-10-01 27446, 2009
ijabz
luks: Is the name field in artist_credit_name ever different to the name in artist that the artist_credit row links to
2009-10-01 27449, 2009
ijabz
or is it just there for performance reasons
2009-10-01 27441, 2009
nikki thinks it can be different
2009-10-01 27452, 2009
nikki
if I understood you correctly...
2009-10-01 27429, 2009
ijabz
nikki:any idea when ?
2009-10-01 27452, 2009
nikki
when an artist is credited differently to the main name they use
so its a bit like an alias but specific to a release(group)
2009-10-01 27423, 2009
aCiD2
warp: brian emailed me yesterday saying he'll be afk for 24 hours ish
2009-10-01 27427, 2009
ruaok joined the channel
2009-10-01 27435, 2009
warp
Cycles`: yesterday is 24 hours ago! ;)
2009-10-01 27405, 2009
aCiD2 joined the channel
2009-10-01 27406, 2009
ijabz
nikki, ruaok: In the release group example at http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Next_Generation_Schem… why does the first name-credit have a name element , but the second element tonly has one inside the artist element, is this right ?
2009-10-01 27401, 2009
nikki
no idea, I don't deal with the xml
2009-10-01 27401, 2009
ruaok
that is not a good example, but technically correct.
2009-10-01 27424, 2009
ijabz
hehe, its the only example I have
2009-10-01 27428, 2009
ruaok
the name element there is for cases where the credit on the liner notes is different from the commonly recognized name.
2009-10-01 27459, 2009
ruaok
in this case, imagine the credit having "Jethro Toe" and it should have "Jetho Tull".
2009-10-01 27422, 2009
ruaok
this was one of the cases that we kept pounding on in the schema summit.
2009-10-01 27433, 2009
ruaok
it will be used very infrequently
2009-10-01 27434, 2009
ijabz
I see , so it shouldnt be shown if both name and artist are the same
2009-10-01 27442, 2009
ruaok
correct
2009-10-01 27418, 2009
ijabz
Ok, also the join phrase seems to be shown against the second term ( & Massive Attack), but in db its held against the first term (Portishead &) , be best if use same syntax (pre or post) in oth db and xml
2009-10-01 27405, 2009
ruaok
actually we already discussed this and luks shot it down.
2009-10-01 27423, 2009
ruaok
I haven't looked that the nuances, but luks says that the way it is now matches the schema.
