Enhancement for filters

[riothamus 51]

Since Smart Playlists are probably still a ways off, I see the potential for the current filter system to provide something of an interim capability.  I was hoping we could see the following additions to the existing filter functionality:

 

1.  The ability to name filters, and save them

2.  Provide a description for the filters

3.  Perhaps provide the output of one filter as input to another filter (for more complex filters, for those of us crazy enough to go down that rabbit hole).

 

Just a thought.

[Luke 38842]

Hi, yes I would like to add the ability to save filters. It's a good idea. Thanks.

[Romek123 42]

i want this too. please let us save filters. and maybe even let us add this filters to front page

[riothamus 51]

i want this too. please let us save filters. and maybe even let us add this filters to front page

 

Oooh, yeah, second that.  Saved filters on the home screen would be nice!

[ebr 15436]

Oooh, yeah, second that.  Saved filters on the home screen would be nice!

 

This comes up in various ways from time to time but, when you talk about putting them on the home screen, what you are asking for is basically Smart Playlists

[riothamus 51]

This comes up in various ways from time to time but, when you talk about putting them on the home screen, what you are asking for is basically Smart Playlists

 

Yeah, and I get that.  But what I had stated at the start of the thread is that this could be a stop-gap, or interim solution until some form of full XSP-style smart playlists are supported.  I suggested that since there is already a structure in place with the filters, then some minor features (such as saving and naming them for instance) could help with some smart playlist use-cases.

[Romek123 42]

filters are allready in place and work like smart playlists. would be easier to let us save them than to provide complete new system (smart playlists).

of course we dont know how far you guys are with working on this

 

from my point of view .... i check this forum almost daily if there are any news for smart playlists for months now

[riothamus 51]

I'm going to illustrate my use as an example.

 

On my Kodi installation, I have this for a smart playlist:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<smartplaylist type="episodes">
    <name>Arrowverse (Full)</name>
    <match>one</match>
    <rule field="tvshow" operator="is">
        <value>Arrow</value>
    </rule>
    <rule field="tvshow" operator="is">
        <value>DC's Legends of Tomorrow</value>
    </rule>
    <rule field="tvshow" operator="is">
        <value>The Flash (2014)</value>
    </rule>
    <rule field="tvshow" operator="is">
        <value>The Flash (1990)</value>
    </rule>
    <rule field="tvshow" operator="is">
        <value>Supergirl</value>
    </rule>
    <rule field="tvshow" operator="is">
        <value>Constantine</value>
    </rule>
    <rule field="tvshow" operator="is">
        <value>Batwoman</value>
    </rule>
    <order direction="ascending">year</order>
</smartplaylist>

Now, to compensate for this within Emby, I have tagged all of these series with "Arrowverse", then I just use the 'filter' feature to only display shows with this tag.  That's three fourths the battle right there.  If we are allowed to save these filters (and name them) that would go further to emulating Kodi's XML-based smart playlist feature.  From there, it's just a small jump to being able to select more than one show at a time in the 'filter' UI with a SQL 'AND' clause to get closer to what I have displayed here (if I did not use the tags feature).  Obviously, a little more logic would be needed to get the 'ascending' feature in full compliance, but the 'filter' code that Emby has now should already be pretty close.

 

(Way) Down the line, Emby could support the ability to import XSP playlist files and map them to their equivalent 'filter' queries to be able to support smart playlists.  However, to get the 'filters' started in the right direction towards this goal, the ability to save them is an excellent first step, that I would imagine is the 'low-hanging fruit' that would be less costly in developer time.

 

Just my two cents.  You guys obviously understand the code far better than I do.  All I see is what is available, not what is actually under the hood, or what you already have lined up to finish.