The change I proposed for IPTC is contingent upon identifying what IPTC
spec we are using. I am surprised that the IPTC IIM spec which is more
recent makes no reference to the IPTC Core spec. I think we need to
determine the correct spec before looking at my proposed change for IPTC
support.
On 07/05/2012 09:16 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
I'll have a look later and let you know.
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Farrukh Najmi
<farr...@wellfleetsoftware.com> wrote:
A similar change needs to be made IMHO to
org.apache.commons.imaging.formats.jpeg.iptc.IptcTypes.java
so that the enum string value is XML Property Id value instead of the IIM
mapping value.
As an example:
COUNTRY_PRIMARY_LOCATION_NAME(
101, "Country/Primary Location Name"),
would become:
COUNTRY_PRIMARY_LOCATION_NAME(
101, "Country"),
I can do this patch for you once I get a +1 to do it. Until the +1 I will
hold off as the work is tedious and time consuming.
Please let me know. Thanks.
On 07/05/2012 06:56 AM, Farrukh Najmi wrote:
Hi Damjan,
Confirming that your recent fix for supporting Exif FieldName looks good
great. Thank you!
When do you think you may be able to commit the changes to support the
following metadata format-specific methods so I can provide feedback:
Imaging.getExifMetadata()
Imaging.getIptcMetadata()
Imaging.getXmpMetadata()
On 07/04/2012 12:38 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
I just committed new TIFF tag names to SVN, let me know how they work for
you.
The best time to add the new metadata methods is before the 1.0
release, since changing binary compatibility later will be harder.
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Farrukh Najmi
<farr...@wellfleetsoftware.com> wrote:
+1 on having the methods:
Imaging.getExifMetadata()
Imaging.getIptcMetadata()
Imaging.getXmpMetadata()
It is is a good idea so one can access metadata-format-specific metadata
in
a metadata-format-specific way and handling all special needs of
specific
metadata formats. These methods should work on any image resource and
throw
something like MissingFeatureException for when a metadata format is not
yet
supported for an image format or throw something like an
InvalidRequestException when a metadata format is invalid for a image
format.
That said, there may still be some value to having a metadata-format
netrual
getMetadata() interface along the lines of the patch I submitted. For
now,
we could simply log an issue and defer it and insteda focus on your
suggestion above. That would meet my needs just fine.
Question is do we do these changes after a formal 1.0 release or before?
May
be it is better to get stable code under current API out as 1.0 and then
work on a 2.0-SNAPSHOT (as opposed to 1.1 since the API changes are not
backward compatible and are in fact major). Or is it better to do these
changes for the 1.0 release so consumers of the project do not get
exposed
to a big API change?
If we can do the proposed change without a long delay then I suggest we
do
it for 1.0. If it means a long delay then I suggest we defer to 2.0.
Thoughts?
On 07/03/2012 03:58 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
I've also considered the metadata interfaces we use, and I am not sure
the current approaches are any good.
Most metadata formats are designed in a way specific to that format,
eg. some have arbitrary levels of nesting, others have a flat
structure, etc. But most are designed to be stored in any image
format.
So instead of a Imaging.getMetadata() method that tries to unify all
metadata into one common interface - and does so badly, because eg.
EXIF can have nested subdirectories and this information is lost -
maybe we should have:
Imaging.getExifMetadata()
Imaging.getIptcMetadata()
Imaging.getXmpMetadata()
Regards
Damjan
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Farrukh Najmi
<farr...@wellfleetsoftware.com> wrote:
Updated proposed patch with following new changes:
Add getValue() method to nested class IImageMetadataItem. These return
the
value of the item as an Object allowing for values of various types to
be
returned.
On 07/03/2012 11:01 AM, Farrukh Najmi wrote:
Moving this thread to dev list as it seems to be more appropriate
there....
Attached is a patch to the IImageMetadata.java that reflects my
revised
proposal thinking this through in conjunction with the proposed
solution
in
another thread...
Add a getMetadataSpecification() method to IImageMetadata so we can
manage
the metadata specification that defines the metadata
Add getMetadata() to nested class IImageMetadataItem to get back at
the
parent IImageMetadata instance so we can access the metadata
specification
information managed from an IImageMetadata instance
Add getId(), getName(), getDescription() methods to nested class
IImageMetadataItem. These are the key triplet of info about the
metadata
item that is needed in my experience
Of course implementations of these two interfaces would need to also
be
updated to support the new methods according to proposed semantics. I
would
be happy to contribute in any way that I can and as requested.
Dev team colleagues, please weigh in on the proposal. Thanks for your
awesome work to create this project and for considering this proposal.
--
Regards,
Farrukh
Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
