Re: [PATCH] metadata-keys: add metadata keys from camera pictures

[Lionel Landwerlin <lionel g landwerlin linux intel com>]

On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 11:57 +0100, Juan A. Suárez Romero wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 10:13 +0000, Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
> > There are a lot different date from Tracker. Like :
> >  * filesystem creation date
> >  * filesystem last modification date
> >  * tracker database insertion date
> >  * dates from metadata (either ID3 tag, EXIF data or more recently the
> > date from filename demangling)
> > 
> > By creation date, I would like to match data from the file's
> > description
> > (EXIF/ID3/filename demang/etc...), whereas the date is more related to
> > the day you got the file (filesystem).
> > 
> 
> 
> Well, it's true there are lot of dates to consider. But the point is
> that I think we should think from an image pov, not from tracker's pov.
> 
> If you present the user with an image and a date, what do you expect the
> date is? I would say the creation date, because I seems for me the most
> important one. Meaning creation date the date it was taken.
> 
> I'm not sure if user is interested at all when the image was inserted in
> the source (i.e, in tracker or flickr), but if it is really needed,
> well, i think we should add a key for it.
> 
> Is it important the filesystem creation date? To be honest, I don't
> think so. User wants grilo to handle content in a high level, and the
> filesystem creation date seems for me a very low level information,
> mostly just a fact of filesystem that other sources probably  won't
> have.
> 
> So summing up: what kind of image's dates (or any other media content)
> are interested for an user (no matter the source the media comes)? I'd
> say creation date, and I also think it is the most important one. If
> there are other dates interesting for users (maybe I'd consider the
> insertion date) then maybe we can add new keys.
> 
> Of course, maybe the problem is that actually DATE shouldn't exist, and
> we should have instead CREATION_DATE, INSERTION_DATE,
> MODIFICATION_DATE, ....

Well I don't care much about the user perspective... It's something
designers want to consider, but it shouldn't be considered at the level
of a framework like Grilo.
Here, I'm just trying to expose 2 different data. In our application we
want to use both, the insertion date being used to present newly
downloaded items and creation date used in pictures description (and
maybe later, used to sort pictures/videos/etc... in a different way it
is today).

If we have to rename the DATE key into something else, that's fine, but
don't mix both things because there're obviously different.

> 
> 	J.A.

--
Lionel Landwerlin