Bug 433423

The terms "Byline" and "Byline Title" are the metadata "Iptc.Application2.Byline" and "Iptc.Application2.BylineTitle". I think these technical terms are okay. What the translators make of them is different, for example the German translation is translated as "Creator of the photo". The creator in the advanced search does not necessarily have anything to do with it. This entry in the DB can also come from "XMP.dc.creator" or others.
According to Wikipedia, "IPTC" is the short form and most commonly used for "IPTC-IIM", so OK.

Gilles, your point of view?

Maik

Hi Maik,

Right, byline is a US-English based term, historically used in IPTC norm for ... "creator of the contents"

I'm not surprised to see the translators using more users friendly variant to describe this common definition. And i agree the US term is ambiguous, but after all it's a norm.

The metadata editor is a low level tool which try to respect the norm and especially the content definitions. This is a more technical approach than Search tool which try to be users friendly de facto...

So for me it's not a bug. We have already other bugzilla entries to revamp the Metadata Editor tool with a new interface more embedded in digiKam sidebar, and and a new engine, but it's another subject and it's not a trivial task.

Voilà

Gilles

I am calling about XMP editor, not IPTC editor.

it exist byline as IPTC field and creator as XMP field. When I edit the field byline into the XMP editor Digikam write a xmp:dc:creator field into the file (that is right). So it seems logical to name this field creator (into the XMP editor only).

Do you speak English natively? How "wrong" is the expression "Byline" for you? I would only change it in the XMP area after the release of digiKam-7.2.0 because I don't know how quickly the translators would adapt it to other languages.

Maik

I don't speak english natively. But in this case it is not matter of language or translation, it is matter of logic : since I am using Digikam with the same language as IPTC standard (english) it seems logical to label an UI metadata field as the corresponding metadata standard name, which is creator in this case (into the XMP Editor) and not byline.

> The creator in the advanced search does not necessarily have anything to do with it. This entry in the DB can also come from "XMP.dc.creator" or others.

You are absolutely right (I forgot that). As a consequence it may be not easy to use if the UI label of the search field don't reflect all possible sources when they have different names across standards (EXIF, IIM, XMP). In my case, as I never use IIM fields, I was not aware of the IIM name of the creator so I searched a little bit before to understand it was byline and not the same name as the XMP metadata field.

> According to Wikipedia, "IPTC" is the short form and most commonly used for "IPTC-IIM", so OK.

I agree but this way many people continue to believe there is a standard from IPTC organization and another one from Adobe. Instead of understand that one (IIM) is a LEGACY standard which should not be used anymore for new photos and that BOTH standards are managed by the same organization (IPTC). Anyway my comment was a"BTW comment" so I don't really care, I just though that Digiakm could help to educate the mass ;-)

> I would only change it in the XMP area after the release of digiKam-7.2.0 because I don't know how quickly the translators would adapt it to other languages.

I understand. Thanks.

Git commit c76a557402e81ed088b6a5eed7e7dcba9a95d22e by Maik Qualmann.
Committed on 28/02/2021 at 19:39.
Pushed by mqualmann into branch 'master'.

rename byline to creator in the xmp edit
FIXED-IN: 7.2.0

M  +2    -1    NEWS
M  +30   -30   core/dplugins/generic/metadata/metadataedit/xmp/xmpcredits.cpp

https://invent.kde.org/graphics/digikam/commit/c76a557402e81ed088b6a5eed7e7dcba9a95d22e