[Digikam-devel] "Album Type" or "Album Family"

[Marcel Wiesweg]

> > I would go with "Album Type", but I don't use this feature anyway, so I'm
> > not a big help here. I usually only tag images, folders can be found
> > quickly with the album search textfield.
> >
> > Anyay,
> > +1 for "Album Type" from me.
>
> Hmm: I never understood these album collections .... ;-)

Me neither. This is a very old concept but apparently still used by some.

>
> Much more consistent to me would be the possibility to associate
> tags to albums, as discussed in
> http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=133011
> However, I am not sure about all consequences of this
> (and what changes would be required ...)

We did not touch the Albums and Tags tables for 0.10 because there is no 
urgent need for this. There are some wishes as the one you mentioned and we 
can look into that for the future, but we can live with the current situation 
quite well I think.

> > > In KDE3, "Album Collection" term been used to sort album tree view by
> > > defined type. It can be considerated a _single tag_ feature for albums.
> > > Not that this data are not stored in database.
> > >
> > > In KDE4, i have used the term "Collections" to design "Root Album
> > > Paths". The old KDE3 "Album Collection" concept still here but have
> > > been renamed "Album Type" (in setup page only). I need to fix the rest
> > > of digiKam strings using "Album Type", for ex in View/Sort Albums, "By
> > > Collection" option still present.
> > >
> > > But i'm not sure if "Album Type" is the right term. Perhaps "Album
> > > Family" is better. What do you think about ?
> > >
> > > Note : In KDE4, "Album Type" data still not stored in database ? Marcel
> > > ?

It is stored in the DB just as it was for KDE3, as the text field "collection" 
in the Albums table.

Marcel


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-devel/attachments/20090102/61f60f23/attachment.html>