Author Topic: Retaining hierarchy of keywords  (Read 6103 times)

Offline Woodie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Retaining hierarchy of keywords
« on: August 29, 2008, 08:22:17 AM »
When hierarchical keywords are entered by PM, they are entered as separate keywords; i.e., People -> Smith -> John is entered as People, Smith, John.  IMatch, Lightroom, and IDImager, probably other applications, will retain the hierarchy if the terms are separated by a dot:People.Smith.John  I asked about changing PM and was told that PM works as it does because the IPTC and XMP standards do not recognize hierarchy, only separate keywords and so I understand the rationale.  I'm looking for possible work arounds to enter keywords with dots to maintain the structure and commas to separate words (the way it works now).  I've used the search and replace function and it works but is cumbersome. Also, it can be used only on one set of words at a time since I want to retain the comma between sets of words while replacing it with a dot within each hierarchical set.  I've also tried using synonyms and this might be the answer.  For example, the keyword would be People.Smith.John.  The synonym is John. This will make a very long list of main keywords however.

I'm just fishing for other approaches to try.

Thanks.


Offline TomM

  • Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Retaining hierarchy of keywords
« Reply #1 on: December 17, 2008, 05:52:06 AM »
...I asked about changing PM and was told that PM works as it does because the IPTC and XMP standards do not recognize hierarchy, only separate keywords and so I understand the rationale.  I'm looking for possible work arounds to enter keywords with dots to maintain the structure and commas to separate words (the way it works now).  ...
Like the previous poster, I also understand the need to adhere to standards, but in this case, I think the standards are lagging:  Without different delimiters to distinguish hierarchy from separate flat keywords, effectively all information on KW hierarchy is lost as soon as the flattened list is written.

Here's a possible workaround: PhotoMechanic could be on the forefront of change of the standards (as well as attract more users) if it provided both options, ie, the user could select (a) flattened, (b) hierarchical KWs (with choice of delimiter), or, for maximum compatibility, (c) both.  If the latter is selected, presumably lagging apps that only read flattened KWs would simply see the dot delimited hierarchical KWs in the list as nothing more than just some more flat KWs.

My situation is that I am managing a collection of about 55k images with hierarchical KWs originally entered using the "|" character as the delimiter. 

I was originally attracted to PhotoMechanic because it (a) seems to be the only front end program that will work properly with Nikon NX2 (... a HUGE thanks!!!), and (b) seemed to have provision for quickly entering hierarchical KWs.  During my trial period with PM (still in place), I was very disappointed to realize that while PM is all set up to enter hierarchical KWs, it effectively threw away all the hierarchical information once the data was written out.

Sorry for the long rant, but hierarchy is really necessary for many of us, and I've been getting very frustrated at the lack of suitable tools for those of us that have to manage large collections of images.

Thanks for your attention,

Tom M

PS - I hope this is in the correct forum.  I replied to the OP's message before I noticed that there was a separate "Request Features" forum.


Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22273
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
Re: Retaining hierarchy of keywords
« Reply #2 on: December 17, 2008, 06:13:16 AM »
Tom,

...I asked about changing PM and was told that PM works as it does because the IPTC and XMP standards do not recognize hierarchy, only separate keywords and so I understand the rationale.  I'm looking for possible work arounds to enter keywords with dots to maintain the structure and commas to separate words (the way it works now).  ...
Like the previous poster, I also understand the need to adhere to standards, but in this case, I think the standards are lagging:  Without different delimiters to distinguish hierarchy from separate flat keywords, effectively all information on KW hierarchy is lost as soon as the flattened list is written.

Here's a possible workaround: PhotoMechanic could be on the forefront of change of the standards (as well as attract more users) if it provided both options, ie, the user could select (a) flattened, (b) hierarchical KWs (with choice of delimiter), or, for maximum compatibility, (c) both.  If the latter is selected, presumably lagging apps that only read flattened KWs would simply see the dot delimited hierarchical KWs in the list as nothing more than just some more flat KWs.

My situation is that I am managing a collection of about 55k images with hierarchical KWs originally entered using the "|" character as the delimiter. 

I was originally attracted to PhotoMechanic because it (a) seems to be the only front end program that will work properly with Nikon NX2 (... a HUGE thanks!!!), and (b) seemed to have provision for quickly entering hierarchical KWs.  During my trial period with PM (still in place), I was very disappointed to realize that while PM is all set up to enter hierarchical KWs, it effectively threw away all the hierarchical information once the data was written out.

Sorry for the long rant, but hierarchy is really necessary for many of us, and I've been getting very frustrated at the lack of suitable tools for those of us that have to manage large collections of images.

In version 4.6 (in development) you can optionally apply any character you like as a keyword separator.  For my testing I have used the '|' character and it works nicely.  Your next question is "when is version 4.6 going to be released?"  The answer is, as soon as possible, likely in the next few weeks.

-Kirk

Offline TomM

  • Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Retaining hierarchy of keywords
« Reply #3 on: December 17, 2008, 06:44:07 AM »
Tom,

In version 4.6 (in development) you can optionally apply any character you like as a keyword separator.  For my testing I have used the '|' character and it works nicely.  Your next question is "when is version 4.6 going to be released?"  The answer is, as soon as possible, likely in the next few weeks.

-Kirk


Wow!!! It's both scary and impressive when someone can read my mind before I even have the thought.  Not only were you planning on including the feature before I asked, you even knew what my next question was going to be. ;-)

I presume you mean that the "|" character will go between KWs within a hierarchical string, and commas will go between adjacent hierarchical strings?

In any case, you convinced me.  I'll convert my trial to a purchase when I get home tonight.  Thanks again.  I don't think I said it in my previous message, but you have a truly great, logically thought out, feature-rich program.  Thank you very much!
« Last Edit: December 17, 2008, 06:48:19 AM by TomM »

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22273
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
Re: Retaining hierarchy of keywords
« Reply #4 on: December 17, 2008, 07:09:49 AM »
Tom,

In version 4.6 (in development) you can optionally apply any character you like as a keyword separator.  For my testing I have used the '|' character and it works nicely.  Your next question is "when is version 4.6 going to be released?"  The answer is, as soon as possible, likely in the next few weeks.

Wow!!! It's both scary and impressive when someone can read my mind before I even have the thought.  Not only were you planning on including the feature before I asked, you even knew what my next question was going to be. ;-)

I presume you mean that the "|" character will go between KWs within a hierarchical string, and commas will go between adjacent hierarchical strings?

That's correct.  (Well with the exception that you can now customize whether repeating fields are separated by commas or semi-colons.)

Quote from: TomM
In any case, you convinced me.  I'll convert my trial to a purchase when I get home tonight.  Thanks again.  I don't think I said it in my previous message, but you have a truly great, logically thought out, feature-rich program.  Thank you very much!

You're welcome.

-Kirk