Support » Plugin: Media Library Assistant » How can i pass the xmp keywords inside the image att tags

  • Resolved Efstathios Efstathiadis



    Thank you for all your help. I have found most of the answers I was looking for in the previous post I made. Your guidelines helped me figure out things a bit better in the MLA plugin.

    There is only one question that I need to ask.
    1) I am trying to pass the keywords from my image in the att tags of the image. (I will need your guide also if this is correct. To me, it seems better for the keywords to be there.).
    So I went to the IPTC & EXIF Processing Options and in the left table, I change the Att. Tags rule. In the field of the IPTC Value, I left it “none” and in the EXIF/Template I put this value template([+xmp:keywords+]). As Priority I left it to IPTC and for the options: a)Existing Text b)Option c)Delimiters I put Replace, Text, ;.
    No keywords were populated inside the Att. tags.

    I even tried to change the Values of b and c to Array and , respectively.
    Still the same results. 0 changes.

    The image that i do the tests is this one: image.

    I have tried template([+xmp:Keywords+]),template([+xmp:photoshop.keywords+]), and template([+xmp:dc.keywords+]). Still nothing.

    I change also the Priority to EXIF. Still no results.

    The XMP file was created from Lightroom.

    I am trying to find a solution but nothing seems to work.

Viewing 5 replies - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Plugin Author David Lingren


    Thanks for the positive feedback on your earlier topic and for this new question. Thanks especially for the link to a sample image file; very helpful.

    The example file does not contain any XMP data labeled “keywords”. It does, however, contain a large number of keyword-like phrases in the dc.subject array. In Adobe Photoshop they appear in the IPTC “Keywords” area, which is very confusing. The “Raw Data” tab shows the real location and label.

    I was able to map the phrases to taxonomy terms with the following rule settings:

    1. Name – Att. Tags
    2. IPTC Value – — None (select a value) —
    3. EXIF/Template Value – template:([+xmp:dc.subject+])
    4. Priority – EXIF
    5. Existing Text – Replace
    6. Option – Array
    7. Delimiters(none – leave this box empty)
    8. Status – Active

    You wrote “(I will need your guide also if this is correct. To me, it seems better for the keywords to be there.” The decision between categories and tags is subjective and application-dependent. I have read that “Categories are structured and formal, like a table of contents. Tags are free-form and informal, like an index.” From the example file you gave it looks like tags are the appropriate choice for your application.

    I hope that gives you the results you seek. I am marking this topic resolved, but please update it if you have any problems or further questions regarding the above suggestions. Thanks for your continued interest in the plugin.

    Thread Starter Efstathios Efstathiadis


    Thank you for your answers above. It worked perfectly.

    I had no idea that these keywords are passed inside the subject

    Another question that came up:
    Is it possible that if the same tags are there, then the mapping could use them and not import them from the start?
    Just to avoid a large number of data entries in DB and somehow keep it cleaner.
    For example:

    I have Photo A and Photo B.
    Photo A has these keywords: key1,key2,key3,key4
    Photo B has these keywords: key1,key2,key5,key8

    I upload Photo A first.
    I upload Photo B second.

    The key1 key2 on Photo B are imported from Photo A so they must be used from there.

    Maybe I am not having this very clear in my mind and it already happens.

    Let me know your thoughts.

    Plugin Author David Lingren


    Thanks for the good news regarding my earlier suggestions.

    You asked “Is it possible that if the same tags are there, then the mapping could use them and not import them from the start?

    If the term names are identical in both photos MLA will match the values in Photo B to the existing terms added for Photo A and will not create duplicate term definitions. For the database, this means that the wp_terms and wp_term_taxonomy tables will not have duplicate rows. The wp_term_relationships table will have separate rows for Photo A and Photo B, as you would expect.

    Thread Starter Efstathios Efstathiadis



    Thank you very much for the clarifications above and also for the time that you put on.

    Also, one last question if you know anything about it.

    I searched a bit the web and found some answers that were more confusing than ever.

    Do the keywords that are inside an image, play any role if they are populated in the media library Att. tag or category, if you are not a photographer and you don’t want to display them elsewhere in your site?

    I sure know that the meta-data is not stripped from woocommerce.
    But does it help on Google or elsewhere, if I also populate them inside the Att tag or category?

    Again I am speaking for the types of websites that do not need to display them elsewhere on the site. An e-shop for example, or a company that sells something.

    Plugin Author David Lingren


    Thanks for the kind words and for your new question.

    As far as I know, terms populated in the WordPress taxonomy tables are not accessed by search engines such as Google or other outside agents. Your theme might add them to the pages it generates, and if they are still embedded in the image files they might be seen by Google, etc.

    Many e-commerce sites use the terms to organize the site into categories, or to provide a search function, and some of these applications could end up exposing the terms to outside agents.

    I am far from an expert in Search Engine Optimization so take the above observations as informal at best.

Viewing 5 replies - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.