| Summary: | SCHEMA : implement generic region tagging of image | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Applications] digikam | Reporter: | Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo> |
| Component: | Database-Schema | Assignee: | Digikam Developers <digikam-bugs-null> |
| Status: | REPORTED --- | ||
| Severity: | wishlist | CC: | bkorb, caulier.gilles, kde-2011.08 |
| Priority: | NOR | ||
| Version: | 3.1.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Platform: | Other | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Latest Commit: | Version Fixed In: | ||
| Sentry Crash Report: | |||
|
Description
Christoph Anton Mitterer
2013-04-14 15:52:05 UTC
Obviously, a further nice feature would be, that such marker/tag regions are exported to to targets that support it, e.g. Flickr. The text should then be copied 1:1 and if (like in the case of Flickr) Polygons were not supported as regions, one should perhaps simply use the rectangle that spans across the whole polygon. MWG guidance provides an XMP standard for the metadata part. IIRC, rectangles and circles. I guess http://www.metadataworkinggroup.org/pdf/mwg_guidance.pdf Section 5.9 applies here, further specified in Section C, right? So you're right, currently there's only Point, Circle and Rectangle... But IMHO that's quite stupid ;-) ... and it seems the standard could be easily extended. Anyway... does digikam already use/conform to MWG? I just send the following mail to: technical@metadataworkinggroup.com ------------------------------------- Hi. This originates from[0]. Currently, the specification seems to only allow regions that are made up of a single(!) area which is either of type Point, Circle or Rectangle. This is highly limiting in two ways: 1) Only one area might be specified, but in a picture or video it can easily happen that a given object (say a building) that should be marked with a region is crossed by some other object (e.g a bridge in the front of it). So you have two not connected areas which should belong to the same region. 2) Most natural objects won't be rectangles or circles; the specification should be extended to allow arbitrary polygons to be used as areas. Note, implementing (1) won't automatically solve (2), because such a polygon area should IMHO _not_ be defined as a list of the current Point area type - this would make it impossible to have a list of points (which might also be reasonable), thus there should be really a separate type. Cheers, Chris. [0] https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=318351 ------------------------------------- no...did not exist when we implemented faces three years ago Hey. So any plans here? Especially in the fields to - unify tags and face tags ... using the MWG syntax - to extend the MWG syntax to allow arbitrary polygons as fields. The later should be easily doable by having something like mwg-rs:Type = digikam-polygon mwg-rs:Area = x1,y1 x2,y2, x3,y3 ; xa,ya xb,yb, xc,yc Using digikam:polygon we don't interfere with their standard's namespace too much and allows us to automatically convert to something standard conformant (should that ever be defined). And the area example here gives two polygons (here triangles) given by their coordinates. Cheers, Chris. Oh but I think it would still make sense of course, to implement the already existing MWG area types as well... things like rectangles and circles are already enough for many cases (like face tags). *** Bug 271829 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Add self to CC list since the *3* year old enhancement request (bug 271829) was closed/dup of this. Just adding yourself would have been enough.. o.O Anyway,… @ Gilles... I saw you changed this to "Database"... but I think it should really go into XMP as well, basically just as I've said in comment #5... and as said before,.. I think it would be best, if this would also replace any "specially handled" face tags. Cheers, Chris. Hey. Anything new on this? Or any chance to ever see this supported? Cheers, Chris. |