[Digikam-devel] What do we want to store in the database?

[Colin Guthrie]

Gilles Caulier wrote:
> 
> 
> 2007/8/31, Marcel Wiesweg <marcel.wiesweg at gmx.de
> <mailto:marcel.wiesweg at gmx.de>>:
> 
>     Am Freitag 31 August 2007 schrieb Gilles Caulier:
>     > 2007/8/31, Marcel Wiesweg
>     <marcel.wiesweg at gmx.de
>     <mailto:marcel.wiesweg at gmx.de>>:
>     > > > I think Multiple Comments is essential. But also comments need
>     to be
>     > > > qualified more than just a simple text stream. Gilles mentioned 4
>     > > > strings to be stored but I'm not sure what they all are. My
>     suggestion
>     > > > would be:
>     > > >  * Source
>     > > >  * Who/Author
>     > > >  * Language
>     > > >  * Comment
>     > >
>     > > Gilles, was that what you meant with 4, a table for multiple
>     comments
>     > > with four columns like the ones above?
>     >
>     > I thinking 4 (more if you want) different comments as UTF-8 strings.
>     > Nothing special about that. We can use like we want, for example
>     to store
>     > text in many language, or text come different photographers.
>     >
>     > You course this still to define more. What the advantage to use a
>     table we
>     > host all strings against 4 separate strings ?
> 
>     Ok, in this case we will store each comment in its own row in a
>     table like
>     this:
>     imageid INTEGER
>     description TEXT
>     value TEXT
> 
> 
> This is what i think in a first time

Without giving it too much thought, I think a date may be a useful field
to store too (thinking ahead to comments pulled in from external sources.

I'd go for a table along the following lines:
imageid INTEGER
date DATETIME (optional)
lang TEXT (optional)
source TEXT (optional)
author TEXT (optional)
comment TEXT

>     Colin suggested to store (instead of "description" above) source,
>     author and
>     language for each comment.
> 
> 
> This is different. It's a Comments with properties. We need to check if
> something exist in XMP schema to get inspiration. No need to re-invent
> the wheel.

Yes I agree, if there is something close in the specs then obviously it
makes sense to work within that general framework. Still, I guess
digikam can be cleverer than what eventually goes into the file itself
as metadata.

Col