File scanner confuses videos with similar names...

[raldo]

to begin with, I have the following examples on disk, in the same folder:
sling blade.iso
blade.iso

blades of glory.iso
glory.iso

and so on.

Initially, all these videos are properly tagged with distinct and correct filenames.

However, when I now scan the disk, PVD wants to change the file path of sling blade.iso to blade.iso, blades of glory.iso to glory.iso.

What gives?

[rick.ca]

PVD wants to change the file path...

It doesn't "want" to—it's only a suggestion.

The scanner needs to be able to detect filenames that have changed, so it's difficult to imagine the program logic that would compare a new filename with one already matched and decide which is the "right" one. I suppose it could be done based on some arbitrary rules, but that would make things more complex. Most users are already challenged by what the regex are doing.

This is far less likely to happen if the year is included in the filename. Doing so also makes the online lookup much more accurate.

[raldo]

so it's difficult to imagine the program logic that would compare a new filename with one already matched and decide which is the "right" one. I suppose it could be done based on some arbitrary rules, but that would make things more complex.

Well, there are algorithms that compare "distances" between strings. Such an algorithm would surely find "blades of glory" closer to "blades of glory" than "glory" when you strip away the extension

But anyways, your tip including the year seems to have cleared most of the problems.

However, I have three videos in VTS format, stored in the following structure [movie name]\video_ts\*.* Now, the first time I scan the files, the scanner manages to relate all the VTS files to the correct movie. Upon the next scan, two of the DVDs come up with "change file path". Closer inspection shows that the VTS files of the third movie is all mixed into the former two. Any ideas on how to fix this? (year) doesn't help..

[rick.ca]

What happens if you get them set correctly (manually, if you have to) and then add them to the ignore list when the scanner detects them again? Not a ideal solution, but might be acceptable if this doesn't happen often.

[raldo]

That's basically what I've done but I thought I'd report it in case the soluton was obvious.