From: sideral <asieoniezi_at_gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 10:37:59 +0100

Thomas Martitz <thomas.martitz_at_student.htw-berlin.de> writes:

> That's one thing I didn't understand (among others). If the resume
> position is not updated in the first 15s, why do you need to disable
> rewind to 0:00 (which is done to save the "precious resume
> point"). IIRC it wouldn't be updated anyway.

Good observation, and nice idea! Unfortunately, this wouldn't work as
of now because of two details:

First, the resume point that would be preserved (in case of a subsequent
track skip or stop within the first 15 seconds) is the _old_ one (at
which the track was first started), not the current playback position.
You could argue that this is wrong, and that rewind to 0:00 should count
as a new track start and update the resume offset (and playback
statistics?) of the "old" track, but right now that is not the case.

Second, even if the current playback position would be preserved, there
is no simple way to return to it. You'd have to skip away from the
track, then play it again. Stopping the track and then resuming
playback wouldn't work because the Resume Playback function would use
the current playlist's resume point near track start, which takes
precedence in this case; I'd argue that anything else would be very
confusing.

Do you have any further suggestions on how we could make your idea work?

> On that note, I feel disabling rewind to 0:00 is a very (too)
> aggressive approach to save the resume.
> Additionally, and that's probably because it's not my use case, but I
> find the preciousness you put into a resume point exaggerated.

We both are entitled to our opinions I guess. Which is why I'm
advocating configurability.

You mention that there were other things did you not understand. Which
ones?

Cheers,
sideral
Received on 2010-12-22