You ask "TODO: What to do about properties not seen in IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008 (e.g. "Record Version"))"
Look at http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/TagNames/IPTC.html Scroll down to "IPTC ApplicationRecord Tags" Those names seem to resemble what is in http://www.iptc.org/std/IIM/4.1/specification/IIMV4.1.pdf page 24 onwards. The names in your patch differ from that list. ? On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Farrukh Najmi <farr...@wellfleetsoftware.com> wrote: > > Oops. Here is the correct file this time. > > > On 07/07/2012 01:39 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: >> >> Hi Farrukh >> >> Your patch is just an empty file. >> >> Regards >> Damjan >> >> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Farrukh Najmi >> <farr...@wellfleetsoftware.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Damjan, >>> >>> Attached is the patch for implementing the proposed change outlined in >>> bullets below. >>> Please review and then commit if satisfied or discuss further. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> On 07/06/2012 02:29 PM, Farrukh Najmi wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> An example of a metadata property that has no IIM mapping defined is >>>> Name: >>>> Scene Code, XMP property id: Scene (page 15 of 55 in spec) >>>> >>>> >>>> On 07/06/2012 02:25 PM, Farrukh Najmi wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Damjan, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the +1. As I started on this patch I made some observations >>>>> in >>>>> the IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008.pdfspec: >>>>> >>>>> * Not all metadata properties have an IIM mapping defined. For these >>>>> we will have to invent a type code. I propose we assign codes >>>>> starting at 10000 arbitrarily in such cases >>>>> * Every field does have an XMP property id at present. I am not sure >>>>> if there is any guarantee that future fields will have an XMP >>>>> property id. I think we should continue with XMP property id for >>>>> IptcTypes.name field but if in future versions there is no XMP >>>>> property id then the backup would be to use the Name field from >>>>> the spec >>>>> >>>>> The only other alternative I can think of for IptcTypes.name field >>>>> issue >>>>> is to use the Name field from the spec which is guaranteed to be >>>>> present, >>>>> will never be translated but has the issue that it has white space in >>>>> its >>>>> content. My preference is to do what is proposed in bullets above. >>>>> >>>>> Comments? Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> > > > -- > 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
