tommy, I asked the questions poorly. The first one was about the MP3s on the hard drive, and the second was about MP3s that have already been created -- MMJB has a super-tagging feature that tries to look them up again in the CDDB and fill in missing values.
Zoe: We're getting him back. Jayne: What are we gonna do, clone him?
'War Stories'
Buffistechnology 2: You Made Her So She Growls?
Got a question about technology? Ask it here. Discussion of hardware, software, TiVos, multi-region DVDs, Windows, Macs, LINUX, hand-helds, iPods, anything tech related. Better than any helpdesk!
§ ita § - Jan 21, 2005 7:00:16 pm PST #1302 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
tommyrot - Jan 21, 2005 7:02:54 pm PST #1303 of 10003
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
Oh. Did I help with your first question? I don't think iTunes has any "super-tagging" feature.
Can iTunes for Windows handle scripting?
§ ita § - Jan 21, 2005 7:05:13 pm PST #1304 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Bless you, tommy! 8 Mile is all together.
Most of my collection was ripped in MMJB. Now I have a reorg plan.
Gris - Jan 22, 2005 9:51:15 am PST #1305 of 10003
Hey. New board.
iTunes does not have super-tagging. It's very annoying, actually. There aren't even any really good external super-tagging programs for Macs that I've found.
Had I thought of it, I would have warned you not to let it reorganize your files for you. The file structure iTunes uses is very nice if you use iTunes itself to rip most of your files, but it often causes problems for people with large collections made by other jukeboxes. It's a very "iTunes is the end all be all of music programs and why would you ever use anything else?" type thing much of the time. I run into some similar problems when I try to play music through my Xbox that you had with the Tivo, though I'm getting the hang of bending iTunes to my wishes.
Jessica - Jan 22, 2005 11:57:24 am PST #1306 of 10003
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Can anyone tell me why this page looks like crap in IE/WinXP when this page looks just fine? They've got identical table structures. (Or, they should. It's possible I've got a typo in there somewhere, but from what I can see, IE is simply ignoring the width attribute on nycfilmcritic.)
In Firefox and Safari and IE/OSX, both pages look the same. I'm being driven maaaaaaaaaaaaad.
DXMachina - Jan 22, 2005 12:18:46 pm PST #1307 of 10003
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
Actually, the page on the old site does odd things for in in IE6/win98, too, just not the same things as the new site. Lemme take a look.
§ ita § - Jan 22, 2005 12:19:34 pm PST #1308 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
What happens when you pour the text from the broken one into the working one? And is there anything in the style sheet that's off?
Looking at it, I can't tell what the problem is, but the the tables differ in width by a column, and length by a row. I'd start from identical on the working one, and make it over step by step with the content of the broken one, and see if it breaks.
Jessica - Jan 22, 2005 12:33:29 pm PST #1309 of 10003
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Huh -- I can get it to work in IE (not perfectly, but I can live with it) if I lose the extra padding column on the left side (the total number of columns is the same). And IE still seems to be treating that width=148 attribute as a suggestion it can take or leave. Very strange.
DXMachina - Jan 22, 2005 12:35:42 pm PST #1310 of 10003
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
I was just going to say what ita said. The tables are different. The newer one has the main text in a double column, with a small border column to its right, while the old one just uses a triple column for text with no right column.
DXMachina - Jan 22, 2005 12:39:41 pm PST #1311 of 10003
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
And IE still seems to be treating that width=148 attribute as a suggestion it can take or leave.
I've had this problem when I've mixed units in specifying width. You're specifying them three different ways, by pixel, by percentage, and by default (in the main text columns), plus you've specified a percent for the table itself. IE can be easily confused.
Also, you don't need "px" in the width attribute.