prodbyarctic wrote:
In the music industry I have to name my file with the name, key, bpm, collaborators and route notes of the composition. Just cutting one part out to make it shorter isn’t an option.
You have to? This is a requirement for your membership? Do they conduct audits?
In the computer industry, what you are describing is a "composite key" and is considered a Bad Thing. Suppose you didn't have complete information and your collaborators or notes were wrong? Then you have to change the file name. But what if you have directly referenced the file name elsewhere? Then you have to track down every use of that file name and change it there too.
What all of those parts are is "metadata" about your file. Even the name of the file is technically metadata. The filesystem uses an "inode" to refer to your file and then looks up the inode based on the text name that you provide when accessing it. Databases will do something similar. The name of a record will be something like "119BD0A2-74AF-442D-B136-AF14D5FA30A6". That value is unique and never has to change. Other systems can save this reference and always refer back to the same thing. But you can supply a more meaningful name, or maybe multiple names, notes, collaborators, literally anything you want. And everything is cross-referenced. You have a collaborator and you want to know what they've worked on? That's easy to do.
It sounds like you have gone beyond basic file management needs. The save dialog simply isn't designed for that. It is doing what it is designed. It may be as small as it is to annoy you on purpose and to push you towards a different way to organize your data.
I suggest you look for some 3rd party document database or organizer apps like DEVONThink, FileMaker Pro, or OmniFocus. While searching for alternatives to these that might be more appropriate for your use, I found this podcast by someone who seems to do similar work where they talk about both DEVONThink and OmniFocus. I don't use these apps myself, but I'm going to look into OmniFocus more closely. I think I really should be using something like this.