Library feature - the next step?

Here is a question: how do you keep the same composer and / or lyricist for the same song that was recorder by various artists?

Let's say I like some song. I also acquired cover versions of it. I put the accurate data in theirs tag fields. I also check if they have the same composer / lyricist; I do not usually put in that info but if I have / know it or need it for some reason then I do. But then some time passes by and I get a new cover of that same song. But I do not remember that I have composer / lyricist information for it and I leave it empty [as I normally do]. And so now I have a slight mess- some of the files have an accurate info and some do not it at all

So how do I currently prevent such information? I can only manually check if I already have a file with such name when adding a new item to my files- and then also manually check if it is the same song and not just a case of a exact or similar title. And that is just tedious and in ~99.9% cases a futile task

So does any one have a better way of dealing with this issue?

And could the new Library feature be somehow adopted or upgrated to cope with this problem?

Hmm, maybe you can do it, by using such already defined tagfields, e. g. "ORIGARTIST" for "original artist" and so on, as listed there ... http://help.mp3tag.de/main_tags.html ... or do setup your own standard for such tag-field-names to keep track of historical data.

DD.20180128.2052.CET

You know that MP3tag is like many other programs a program that reacts to formal data characteristics.
Guessing, assuming, stipulating is not its best capabilities.
But it is good in the functions of sorting in filtering.

If you cannot operationalize how you determine identical or just similar information then how should the program do it?

I think, you misunderstood me

I am well aware of the ORIGARTIST field. I use it profoundly, just like ORIGYEAR. I also use made up fields

I also distinguish for the longest time now between concept of original artist and composer a well as lyricist [and album artist as well and featured performers being something completely different than the the main performer]

And yet it give the user ability to use the "guess values" and "replace with regular expression" action

I think, you however understood what it is that I am after

But I do "operationalize" and optimize; trying to plan ahead in anticipation of errors [in that I do whatever I can to avoid them]. But I see I need to elaborate on my questions

I will not give numbers about it but a frequent request on this forum is to implement an ability in Mp3tag of running more instances of it than just one. I also made such request [/t/16706/1] and even specifically because this problem of mine with composers and lyricist. I have also made a request about pre-loading of files [/t/19265/1]; evoking then a concept of a mini-Mp3tag that would somehow have a list of files and constantly check them. And now we have the Library function that checks them once at the beginning- in hopes of saving user the time. I see in this a kind of an entry point in realization of the concept presented by me- in the end my additional instance of a mini version was suppose to also save time of the user. The goal is the same but approach different [and outcome vastly different]

So Library is something completely new to the Mp3tag inner-workings. But it opens a door to thinking outside of the box, does it not? And this is the purpose of this thread

I personally do not see a way of using Library to standardize content of the COMPOSER and LYRICIST fields; to fill it automatically with the same data. But could not there be some new [similar] function that would do that if a given condition would arise? Something that would come down to >>If "Name XYZ" appears in the TITLE tag then fill it with that [pre-defined] Composer A and that [also listed] Lyricist B - and also tell me somehow about it and preferably ask before going through with such filling of data to my files"? For now it hard to imagine as it averts from how Mp3tag works- but the same could be told about Library for the last 19 years. And yet we have it now in an fully operational state

So I appreciate if anyone would give in hers or his ideas about such hypothetical new function; and / or about the problem of keeping the same unified LYRICIST / COMPOSER when adding new files while not remembering of having such. As right now the only way that I can maintain order is this pretty much manual set of steps:

1] Add with an action to all new files some kind of marker, for example "NEW"

2] Turn on a column that displays the tag field bearing the marker

3] Load all of the files, old and new ones

4] Sort the files alphabetically by TITLE

5A] Look file by file going down the list, stopping for evaluation with neighboring files when the NEW marker appears in my eyesight
[ or ]
5B] Export list of TITLEs that have the NEW marker and then one by one copy them to Filter box to see if more than one file is shown

6] Repeat point 5 in hopes of finding those few missed cases

7] Repeat 1-6 every time if even one new song is added

Cannot we come up with some method of automating this process [from 1 to 5]? Is not there are a need for such feature? Does not anyone else have similar problems when adding new files?

Could also be done by sorting by creation or modification date.

Going down a list of more than 100.000 files and scanning them with your eyes is hardly a feasible way. with just a 3 seconds scan over 30 files it will take you almost 3 hours of constant concentration.

The new library allows you do load much more files than before, you should be able to locate those that you just added and others that have similar words in the tags even in big collections.

For this it is actually not necessary to run several instances of MP3tag but simply to use the filtering and sorting functions that MP3tag already has. This should reduce the displayed records to a manageable chunks.

I did such manual task for 20 000 files 2 or 3 times. I am not doing it anymore. It is futile, as it does not guarantee my no errors [misses]