On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Brian Candler <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:44:27PM +0200, Peter DO Smith wrote: > > Tying the logical model of your data to the physical model creates more > > problems than it solves and greatly reduces flexibility. > > We are both entitled to our opinions of course. > Yes, and the considered exchange of opinions is invariably helpful. > > If all your metadata persists in a shotwell sqlite3 database, the downside > is that it's not available to any other application (unless that > application > is specifically written to open the shotwell database - which may or may > not > be documented or supported). Hence the already accepted suggestion to > persist the metadata elsewhere, such as EXIF/XMP/IPTC, in ticket #1290. > Yes, that would be advantageous, though, speaking as a developer, I think it is much easier to work with the sqlite3 database. Its structure is easily deduced by inspection. > > I am just pointing out that the filesystem path is another option for > storing metadata which is highly accessible to a broad range of other > applications and devices. > If one is already storing other metadata elsewhere should not the event data be stored there as well? I organise my photos as follows /some/path/YEAR/MONTH. To me this seemed so obvious and natural that I could hardly conceive of any other way of doing it. But my friends surprised me by insisting their way of doing it was better (they had a point and they all differed). My point being that each person has their own way of physically organising their files and Shotwell respects this. > > Furthermore, I may want to be able to locate a picture quickly, for example > to attach it to an E-mail. If the filesystem path is unrelated to any > logical grouping, It need not be unrelated. You can still organise your files physically as it suits you. Though if you use Shotwell to import directly from the camera you are stuck with the Shotwell model of YEAR/MONTH/DAY > then I would have to (1) launch shotwell, (2) browse to > the event, (3) ask shotwell to map this to the directory path, (4) navigate > to that path in my mail client. > True, but if you have a medium to large photo collection the only realistic way of locating your photos quickly is to do it through a photo manager such as Shotwell. One of the features I would like to see is the ability to drag a photo from Shotwell and drop it into the email I am composing. Gmail (which I use) already has a drag and drop interface for attachments but sadly I cannot access it from Shotwell. > > Regards, > > Brian. > _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
