Sidecar files and Digikam

[Willem Ferguson]

Am Montag, den 11.06.2012, 17:43 +0200 schrieb Marie-Noëlle Augendre:

> XMP sidecar files are specific to each application. There is no way
> one can read the .xmp file written by another program.
>
> Marie-Noëlle
| Well yes. But as far as I've understood that's the reason why there are
| namespaces. And Bibble5, Corel Aftershot, Adobe Lightroom and Adobe
| Bridge can understand these files. I'm not talking about information on
| editing. It's totally clear that this will not work. But it should be
| possible to read keywords, shouldn't it?


Dear Dk enthusiasts,

Is there not a strong case to be made for Dk reading the XMP files for at least some of the other sofware? Compatibility with some of the major image processing software packages, e.g. Darktable and Adobe would increase the usefulness of Dk and draw many more users to use Dk. Granted, Dk is KDE-based and (at least the 2 mentioned above) are not. But I cannot see that this could be a major problem???

Kind regards,
Willem Ferguson





_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Andrew Goodbody]

On 11/06/12 17:40, Willem Ferguson wrote:

> Dear Dk enthusiasts,
>
> Is there not a strong case to be made for Dk reading the XMP files for
> at least some of the other sofware? Compatibility with some of the major
> image processing software packages, e.g. Darktable and Adobe would
> increase the usefulness of Dk and draw many more users to use Dk.
> Granted, Dk is KDE-based and (at least the 2 mentioned above) are not.
> But I cannot see that this could be a major problem???
>
> Kind regards,
> Willem Ferguson

The use of an application specific namespace in xmp sidecar files is a
huge nuisance. The ability to read other applications data where
appropriate seems a must to me. Writing data in a format that could be
read by as many other applications as possible is merely highly
desireable. Using a unique namespace just because everyone else does is
just exacerbating the problem and is not to be encouraged.

Andrew
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Remco Viëtor]

On Monday 11 June 2012 18:22:21 Andrew Goodbody wrote:

> On 11/06/12 17:40, Willem Ferguson wrote:
> > Dear Dk enthusiasts,
> >
> > Is there not a strong case to be made for Dk reading the XMP files for
> > at least some of the other sofware? Compatibility with some of the major
> > image processing software packages, e.g. Darktable and Adobe would
> > increase the usefulness of Dk and draw many more users to use Dk.
> > Granted, Dk is KDE-based and (at least the 2 mentioned above) are not.
> > But I cannot see that this could be a major problem???
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Willem Ferguson
>
> The use of an application specific namespace in xmp sidecar files is a
> huge nuisance. The ability to read other applications data where
> appropriate seems a must to me. Writing data in a format that could be
> read by as many other applications as possible is merely highly
> desireable. Using a unique namespace just because everyone else does is
> just exacerbating the problem and is not to be encouraged.

Have you looked at a Digikam XMP sidecar? I just did, and saw 8 lines in the
'Digikam' namespace, the others were in other namespaces, and the information
in the Digikam namespace seemed to be duplicated in the other namespaces.

So Digikam is *not* storing its information only in its private namespace...

But, the namespace inside the xmp file is one part of the problem. The other
is the filename Digikam has to look for:
dk uses <basename>.<rawextension>.XMP, if another program decides to use
<basename>.xmp, or something more exotic, that opens up a whole different can
of worms.

Remco



_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users