Yes, the default mappings only serve as a suggestion/example. They could/should probably be developed further. Also, mapping multiple tag names was originally thought to be important, but has proven to not be so important. The original reason for doing this was that in my original test set different types of files (or made by different creators) would have similar information in different fields (ie. the iptc caption-abstract and exif imagedescription), and I wanted the 'caption'-like info to go into the same RS field. However, not much research has since gone into how multiple tag names work out.
On Aug 14, 2010 4:48 AM, "Jeff Harmon" <jeffrey...@gmail.com> wrote:
i advise making them separate fields, and using group name:tag for all
designations.
also of interest:
"ExifTool prioritizes the following types of meta information when
writing:
1) EXIF, 2) IPTC, 3) XMP
Many tag names are valid for more than one of these groups. If a group
name is not specified when writing information, then the information
is added only to the highest priority group for which the tag name is
valid (however, the information is updated in all groups where the tag
already existed). The priority of the groups is given by the list
above. Specifically, this means that new information is added
preferentially to the EXIF group, or to the IPTC group if no
corresponding EXIF tag exists, or finally to the XMP group.
Alternatively, information may be written to a specific group only,
bypassing these priorities, by providing a group name for the tag."
- Jeff
On Aug 13, 12:29 pm, dmisaacs <dannyisa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to grasp the way that ...