bruns added a comment.
In D21519#475781 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D21519#475781>, @ngraham wrote: > In D21519#474885 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D21519#474885>, @astippich wrote: > > > @ngraham what's your take regarding "Manufacturer" vs. "Equipment Manufacturer"? > > > "Manufacturer" is shorter, but since the metadata is attached to a photo, the longer version might make more sense to cement that it's a property of the camera itself, and not the photo! But is it really ambiguous? If it states "Canon", "EOS 70D" or "Nikon", "D5000 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D5000>", there isn't much room for interpretation. Also, "Equipment" is not really fitting very well - what about the lense, what about the tripod, the flash(es)? And what/who would a "Photo manufacturer" be? We are talking about digital images here. The more I think about it, the more I dislike the enum renaming - reusing a strange name from some widely used standard is one thing, but inventing a new one I don't consider a good idea. REPOSITORY R286 KFileMetaData BRANCH euqipment_properties REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D21519 To: astippich, ngraham, bruns Cc: kde-frameworks-devel, #baloo, LeGast00n, domson, ashaposhnikov, michaelh, astippich, spoorun, ngraham, bruns, abrahams
