So far I have no hierarchical taxonomies in place and I am not used to this approach.
My workflow starts from Lightroom onwards. I like to populate a 3-digit-number in the category field and the field subcategory itself for subcategory. The title of the main category will be populated the field special instruction.
After syncing with WP/LR Sync I like to populate 2 elements into the attachment_category.
2#015 category => 01
2#020 subcategory => Sub Category
2#040 special instruction => Main Category
WP att. category
term 1 => 01 Main Category
term 2 => 01 Sub Category
I can’t find a mapping rule to create this output. Do you have an idea?
BTW: I could see that the fields 2#015, 2#020 (IPTC IIM) have been depreciated. Do you know which will come likely after that? 🙂
- This reply was modified 1 year, 10 months ago by ernstwg.
Ah, okay. I found something about subject newscodes 🙂
Thanks for your question and for the details on how you are using IPTC to categorize your media.
You wrote “I can’t find a mapping rule to create this output. Do you have an idea?” You can use a content template for this purpose. The taxonomy mapping rules accept a comma-separated list of terms, so you can enter this template in the “EXIF/Template” text box of the mapping rule for the Att. Categories taxonomy:
template:([+iptc:2#015+] [+iptc:2#040+])(,[+iptc:2#015+] [+iptc:2#020+])
Note, however, that this rule creates two “flat” terms in the root level of the Att. Categories taxonomy. If you want “01” as a separate parent term and “Main Category” and “Sub Category” as child terms you will need a different approach. MLA has an example plugin that lets you code multi=level hierarchical terms. You can find details in this earlier topic:
Once the example plugin is installed and active, the content template for your application would be something like:
In the above template the spaces are replaced with slashes (‘/’) to separate the terms into parent and child terms. The example plugin has a Documentation tab that explains everything.
You wrote “I could see that the fields 2#015, 2#020 (IPTC IIM) have been depreciated. The deprecated warning applies to using these fields in a “newsroom” application. I am confident that the fields will be usable indefinitely just because so many existing image files contain them.
You wrote “I found something about subject newscodes“. It looks like this is a reference to IPTC efforts to create controlled vocabularlies for newsroom applications. I found this information on the IPTC web site:
IPTC creates and maintains sets of concepts – called controlled vocabularies or taxonomies – to be assigned as metadata values to news objects like text, photographs, graphics, audio and video files and streams. This allows for a consistent coding of news metadata across news providers and over the course of time – that’s the reason why we call them IPTC NewsCodes.
The Subject Codes is the original IPTC subject taxonomy, with a focus on text. It consists of about 1,400 terms structured into 3 levels.
IPTC is not actively maintaining the Subject Codes taxonomy, and would recommend that news organisations adopt its successor, the Media Topics vocabulary.
Media Topics is a constantly updated taxonomy of over 1,200 terms with a focus on categorising text. Originally based on the IPTC Subject Codes taxonomy, the Media Topics taxonomy was first released in 2010 and is updated at least once a year.
I haven’t looked into how these terms are stored in the IPTC fields. If you find a good application for them, post an update and share your findings.
I am marking this topic resolved, but please update it if you have problems or further questions about the content template suggestions. Thanks for your continued interest in the plugin.
Hi David. Many thanks for helping. With the path mapping plugin I am quite lucky. Looks good what I have achieved so far.
I have a question. Just want to apply this approach to another custom taxonomy (regarding location information). Can’t get it to work. One point of difference:
1. Option of taxomony Att. Cat. is Text and cannot be changed.
2. Mapping rule template:([+iptc:2#020+])(,[+iptc:2#020+] – [+iptc:2#040+])
3. One output format is following “string1 – string2”
Option of my Custom taxomony Att. Loc. is Array and cannot be changed.
1. Option of taxomony Att. Cat. is Array and cannot be changed.
2. Mapping rule template:([+iptc:2#101+])(,[+iptc:2#101+] – [+iptc:2#090+])
3. None of the output format is equal to “string1 – string2”.
4. The dash itself is shown as an output element.
Can that difference between Text and Array explain anything and is there a setting to manipulate this behaviour?
Thanks for your update with the details of your rules and their effect.
Yes, the difference between option Text and option Array explains the problem you are having with the Att. Loc taxonomy rule. The “cannot be changed” remark has uncovered a defect in the current MLA version – thank you for finding it!
If you use the full-screen “Edit” rollover action the option code changes are not recognized; that’s the defect. You can use the inline “Quick Edit” rollover action to change the option setting to Text, which will correctly create the two terms you want and omit the dash (“-“) term. Make sure you have a comma in the “Delimiters” text box for the rule.
The “Array” option setting is the original default and works well if the template only contains a substitution parameter such as
[+iptc:2#025+](Keywords). It fails for more general text values like yours. The “Text” option was added for this earlier support topic along the same lines:
So, if you use the “Quick Edit” rollover action to change your Option to Text, all should be well. I will work on correcting the defect you uncovered in the full-screen “Edit” action; thanks again for alerting me to it.
Thank you for guiding me. And for all the great stuff you are providing 🙂
You are most welcome.
I have uploaded a new MLA Development Version dated 20210204 that corrects the full-screen Edit Option problem. You can find step-by-step instructions for using the Development Version in this support topic:
It would be great if you could install the Development Version and let me know if it works for you. Thanks again for alerting me to this MLA defect.
The new version is working well. Thanks for acting so far.
- The topic ‘Cocatination of terms’ is closed to new replies.