Got it, thanks. It's fine, I know it's a complex topic. The 'assets' in this particular case is my keyword library. I love PM, but the limitations it has with managing a keyword library in-program is a severe limitation. A change of any real size clearly needs to be done through a second program and then loaded back into PM. Yeah, I'll want duplicates removed. I've deleted them manually for this, but it's not ideal in a long term solution. PM uses IPTC metadata, and they're linked on a per-photo basis, you're correct. I use PM to attach appropriate keywords to each image and then upload them to my archive site. The structured keyword feature of PM lets me attach them faster and more consistently to a group of many related images. It's just unfortunate that it's not easier to manage the keywords themselves through the program. -Matt
On Wednesday, October 12, 2022 at 1:49:24 PM UTC-4 Harvey Pikelberger wrote: > Basically I'm using JavaScript as the solution, and my impression is a > reliable solution might take a while to develop. > > For instance, the 2nd list you sent tripped up the original JS solution > because it included keywords with spaces. > No big deal / easy enough to tweak, but kind of shows how one fix reveals > underlying additional challenges. > > So check this out: You might notice that the case-insensitive sorted list > reveals a lot of duplicate keywords. > I imagine you'd want those removed, which in turn would involve preserving > but not duplicating sub-keywords. > > I'm not familiar with Photo Mechanic, but apparently it uses IPTC > metadata. I wonder if that means the keywords are embedded into the > metadata on a per-photo basis. The best solution would involve better > understanding the underlying logic (along with the idiosyncratic quirks) of > the software + knowing what you're trying to achieve (and how that might > evolve). > > Apologies for the not-so-concise answer here. Asset management can get > pretty involved. imho, everything off-the-shelf has frustrating limits. > And the solution to that -- building out custom solutions -- has a steep > learning curve. > > > > > > > On Wednesday, October 12, 2022 at 10:01:23 AM UTC-7 > [email protected] wrote: > >> Case-insensitive works perfectly! Thank you so much, this is exactly what >> I wanted to do. >> Knowing now that this works, is there any info you could provide to let >> me do this kind of sorting myself? As my workflow evolves it's possible >> I'll need to do it again. PM doesn't let one move or sort more than one >> keyword at a time, so I'll be using an external program for bulk sorting >> and changes. >> -Matt >> >>> >>>>> -- This is the BBEdit Talk public discussion group. If you have a feature request or need technical support, please email "[email protected]" rather than posting here. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: <https://twitter.com/bbedit> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BBEdit Talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bbedit/f8c72fc0-db23-4e91-9d2a-4ac187cc45cfn%40googlegroups.com.
