[digiKam-users] digiKam "date"s and times

[Maik Qualmann]

Well, there is no timeline to answer. We are all very busy at the moment as 
well, we supports students as part of GSoC2019. The EXIF original date has a 
double priority. If you have a image that you believe digiKam detects the 
wrong date, send it to me by e-mail.

Maik

Am Sonntag, 16. Juni 2019, 18:04:22 CEST schrieb Jim Todt:
> Hi.  What is the protocol/etiquette here - what is the timeframe that
> one should wait for response before asking again?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> On 6/10/19 3:17 PM, Jim Todt wrote:
> > Thank you all for the prompt replies!
> > 
> > @Gilles:
> > 
> > "read the code" is unfortunately of limited value - many (like me)
> > either can't or can't with any reasonable facility; reading a code
> > snippet only reveals that snippet, not the whole picture; reading code
> > can only show what the code does, not what it is _supposed_ to do;
> > etc.  To me, that last is key:  I would like to know what digiKam is
> > supposed/designed/spec'd to do - because that is how I should arrange
> > my workflow.
> > 
> > Agreed, this is a complex issue - all the more reason to know
> > explicitly what is supposed to happen...
> > 
> > I looked at the bug but it doesn't seem to have any detail? Neither
> > exactly what might be implemented nor when?
> > 
> > @woenx:
> > 
> > I agree the EXIF Original date should be used.  Unfortunately in my
> > tests so far digiKam ignores it. :(
> > 
> > @Maik:
> > 
> > Is there a (non-code :) ) description of how this ranking is supposed
> > to happen?  And once this date (THE date) is determined, is it then
> > supposed to be used everywhere for all functions within digiKam?  Or
> > are other dates involved in different places/functions?
> > 
> > I don't understand the logic of your example.  In that scenario, the
> > user hasn't "corrected" either their mistake nor the date. The user
> > has in fact _added_ another date and increased the problem.
> > 
> > Admittedly I don't have knowledge of all the bug reports or other
> > scenarios - all the more reason I'd like to understand how digiKam is
> > trying to resolve these issues.  If one believes that the user, at
> > least from their perspective, "corrected" the date, then wouldn't a
> > simpler, better approach be to confirm that with the user and then use
> > this date for EXIF Original, as the user intended in the first place?
> > 
> > @all:
> > 
> > Would also appreciate your comments on the other questions:
> > 
> > View sorting uses filesystem dates?
> > 
> > Is there any plan/schedule for the EXIF Offset Timezone fields to be
> > used?
> > 
> > Best Practices for dates, including UTC?
> > 
> > Thanks!