> > So I propose, one schema for the data chunk: > > uri: http://create.freedesktop.org/xmp/MakerNote/1.0 > > prefix: mkn > > > > With only value: > > > > RawData as a String with the MakerNote encoded in base64 > > I'm not sure if it fits into XMP and if it is really the way to go. >From Adobe's point of view, it doesn't :)
> Including the blob does not solve any problem, even future. Because said > data is still in the corresponding Exif, there is no interest in having > it undecoded in the XMP. Well there is on interest to have it "somewhere", if the knowledge of how to decode them improve in the future. > > Then as many schema as specification, with an uri of the form > > http://create.freedesktop.org/xmp/MakerNote/MANUFACTURER/VERSION > > > > For instance, for Canon (http://www.burren.cx/david/canon.html) > > http://create.freedesktop.org/xmp/MakerNote/Canon/1.0 > > > > With tags beeing: > > ImageType as string > > FirmwareVersion as string > > ImageNumber as integer > > OwnerName as string > > CameraSerialNumber as integer > > MacroMode as boolean > > Quality as choice > > FlashMode as choice > > ... > > > > What do you think ? > > XMP is *semantic*. That means what is interesting is not the content but > the meaning. In short Maker Notes would have to be translated into > something meaningfull. That's almost what the second part tries to > address, but I don't think it is the right way. It should be maker > independent properties, ie not a separate namespace for each manufacturer. Hum, yes that makes sense. And relooking carefully throught all the available spec, there is indeed a lot of overlap. -- Cyrille Berger _______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
