It would be Very Nice Indeed if in the metadata section, we could tell PL to automatically attach the relevant DxO software versions as well as providing a (searchable/filterable) flag to ‘look at this image again in the future’.
Where would it live? DOP, XMP or database?
…to answer that properly we’d need to know that design philosophy and direction for dop, xml, and database. Devs/architects would need to participate in that discussion. Certainly on export, there is room in exif/icc fields for this kind of information.
Personally, I’d like to see the ‘database’ go away in favor of a more robust implementation of the dop/xml files (can of worms warning)
That is of course a conversation for another time.
I’m trying to understand this request. Presently, when a DxO application (PL and others also) exports to a file, it writes its identity with version number into the EXIF “Software” field. It will overwrite whatever is already in that field. Do you want this behavior to change? If so, how and why? (Sorry, I don’t know what is meant by “look at this image again in the future.”)
Ah, the IFD0 tag fields! (of course). But then again, we only get that on exported files, not as an adjunct to raw files.
I was thinking of adding the capability duplicating a select few exif/icc fields and at the same time make keywords searchable/filterable as the star ratings and red/green color tags are.