The VARIOUS tag is utterly redundant with the ALBUM ARTIST tag. If there's an ALBUM ARTIST tag, you can successfully assume the album is VARIOUS. There'd be no need to add ALBUM ARTIST unless it is various.
I've been using SUBTITLE on a track-level basis, like this: "Paul van Dyk - The Riddle (Tell Me Why)" becomes TITLE = "The Riddle", SUBTITLE = "Tell Me Why".
As for SUBALBUM, there are some places where it could be useful. Check
Music for the Jilted Generation for an example of where it's useful. The last three tracks in particular.
@dev0: Does it really remap? Interesting. I wouldn't think that foobar would second-guess the user like that, hehe.
Edit:Instead of spamming you all by posting another topic, I'll add to this one.
Looking at DISC, it doesn't appear to be redundant at all, as Prodoc mentioned. SET_TITLE appears to want to be filled with text. DISC refers to the specific disc in the set. SET_NUMBER may work though, and I suppose SET_TITLE could work too, but it'd be a bit of a hack, IMO. Whatever it is, it's a grouping of Chapters in Matroska terminology.
Like spase mentioned, there's the question of how to list the number of tracks. I currently format my TRACKNUMBER tag as 01/12 for example. That doesn't feel right to me. There should be a LASTTRACK tag or something. Likewise for DISC, if that's adopted as the proper way.
We should also have an implicit distinction between the different levels of meta-data. Perhaps some redundancy can be eliminated this way. Here's how I see it, with bracketed entries being things that I've seen, but don't happen very often.
- Artist
- Album
- Disc
- (Subalbum)
- Track
- (Subtrack)
With the main entries, meta-data can be added at that level to eliminate redundancy. For example, if you were tagging an album, you should only really need to add ARTIST once. It should then be inherited to all the tracks. Likewise for ALBUM and DATE.
Subalbum I've seen in places where I use the SUBALBUM tag. It's probably the most useful of the two odd ones.
Subtrack is another odd one. One clear distinction of it is on Underworld's "Second Toughest in the Infants" CD, tracks 1 and 2. Here's the title of track 1: Juanita/Kiteless/To Dream of Love.
I've listened to the track, and there appear to be three logical places where you could segment the track into its three namesakes. They're just more closely linked to each other than to track 2. There's a pause between tracks 1 and 2, but all the subtracks flow together.
Mike Oldfield's Amarok could be another good distinction. Although a lot of people view it as a CUE file, the components aren't really stand-alone tracks. Instead, they appear to be more just elements of the cohesive whole.
I've really gone off here; if we keep things simple, a lot of this complexity isn't necessary. I can stand to add album-level elements to the tracks.