Re: Metadate comment field

Peter Lewis wrote:
> Hi Aurélien
> 
> Thank you for getting back to Jaume. I note that he quotes my earlier comments 
> on the matter.
> 
> I do appreciate the less cluttered gwenview interface on version 2 and I would 
> like to add my ha'p'orth here.
> 
> I inherited many books of photographs from my ancestors and have done my best 
> to identify the what, where and when of as many as possible. In all this I 
> relied on those pictures that were annotated, on the back or in the book, but 
> still there are hundreds that we can not identify.
> 
> The most infuriating set of photos is a collection of several hundred slides 
> from my aunt who had spent many months climbing in the European Alps before 
> and after the second world war. They had a set of annotations but the 
> annotations were indexed to the box that the slides had once been in. This was 
> most annoying as we had to do our best by a process of elimination.
> 
> For posterity the annotation must be tied irrevocably to the picture - please.

I agree, that's why I suggested this solution:

>> But it's true that there are advantages in embedding the comments inside
>> the image. I think the best solution would be to add an option which
>> would make Gwenview store comments in the image whenever possible, in
>> addition to Nepomuk. What do you think about this?

Aurélien

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise
-Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation
-Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD
http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H