Re: Show all tags in Albums? (Was: Terminology)

["Dotan Cohen" <dotancohen gmail com>]

On 19/09/06, Warren Baird <photogeekmtl gmail com> wrote:
> Dotan Cohen wrote:
> > On 19/09/06, Sam Barker <sam quadrocket co uk> wrote:
>
> >> As I see it a picture belongs to an album and a tag belongs to a
> >> picture, not the other way round. I think this distinction is
> >> fundamental. A tag is just an arbitrary piece of meta data, an album is
> >> some kind of container.
> >
> > Also here, I agree with you. By that thinking, a picture could belong
> > to only one single album, which I happen to agree with. Hwoever, that
> > was frowned upon on the list. I personally like the idea.
>
> I don't follow your logic...    If "a picture belongs to an album"
> implies that each picture can only belong to one album, does that mean
> "a tag belongs to a picture" mean that each tag can only belong to one
> picture?

Yes, I saw this hole when I wrote it. From a technical point of view,
as the tag information is stored in each photo, then the photo
information should be stored in each album, and not the other way
around. Thus, a photo would not have any information regarding to
which album it belongs to. The "album" would be an XML file that
specifies what pictures belong to it. It would also contain the
information regarding order of the pictures.

This way sounds best. It also avoids the problem of transfering photos
from one user's library to another user's library. Ben might have an
album named Birthday, and Shirly may have an album named Birthday. If
Ben has a photo in his Birthday album, and the album information is
stored in the photo itself, then when he sends the photo to Shirly it
will magically appear in her Birthday album as well. She might not
want that.

For that matter, this must be the case currently with the tags. I'll
think of some suggestions for the problem and file a bug.

Dotan Cohen