XMP Metadata and Open Document Format

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Greetings!

I have not been able to complete my comparison of XMP and ODF metadata 
but I do have a preliminary mapping.

I followed and cited the ODF specification sections for ease of 
reference. I have listed the nearest XMP equivalent following "=>." The 
emphasis should be on "nearest XMP equivalent" due to differences in 
metadata models.

3.1.1 meta:generator => xmp:CreatorTool

3.1.2 dc:title => dc:title

3.1.3 dc:description => dc:description

3.1.4 dc:subject => dc:subject

3.1.5 meta:keyword => no nearest XMP equivalent

3.1.6 meta:initial-creator => no nearest XMP equivalent

3.1.7 dc:creator => dc:creator

3.1.8 meta:printed-by => no nearest XMP equivalent

3.1.9 meta:creation-date => xmp:CreateDate

3.1.10 dc:date => dc:date

(Seems to me that dc:date in ODF includes the xmp:MetadataDate and 
xmp:ModifyDate.)

3.1.11 meta:print-date => no nearest XMP equivalent

3.1.12 meta:template => no nearest XMP equivalent

(Note that meta:template provides attributes for: template location, 
template title, template modification date and time.)

3.1.13 meta:auto-reload => no nearest XMP equivalent

3.1.14 meta:hyperlink-behavior => no nearest XMP equivalent

3.1.15 dc:language => dc:language

3.1.16 meta:editing-cycles => no nearest XMP equivalent

3.1.17 meta:editing-duration => no nearest XMP equivalent

3.1.18 meta:document-statistic => The XMP Paged-Text Schema does provide 
for xmpTPg:NPages to provide page count but there is no equivalent to 
the remaining 18 attributes in meta:document-statistic. (I counted 
meta:page-count only once even though it also appears in spreadsheet and 
graphic.)

3.2 meta:user-defined => I don't see the creation of custom schemas 
and/or extending schemas as really being equivalent here. In part 
because the meta:user-defined is more constrained than the more general 
model of XMP customization/extension.

Unless otherwise noted, I don't think that ODF directly supports the 
remaining metadata specified by the XMP document.

BTW, where XMP says that dc:subject is a bag (RDF), ODF provides that 
the dc:subject element can simply be repeated. (The repeatability of 
dc:subject is a characteristic of all ODF metadata elements.) That 
leaves it up to the application as to how it will read multiple 
instances of that element. I read that to mean that an application could 
read multiple dc:subject elements as an RDF bag, should it choose to do so.

What I have not satisfied myself on is the question of whether the 
metadata that is not supported by ODF could be represented with 
meta:user-defined. That will require my going though all the XMP 
metadata along with the values type allowed for optional meta:type 
attribute on user defined metadata to see if float, date, time, boolean 
and string are sufficient to represent the values permitted in XMP. 
There are a large number of values to consider and I was unable to reach 
that part of my analysis for this post.

Given the number of values listed in the XMP document, I will compose 
that analysis as an ODF document to submit to the TC.

Hope everyone is at the start of a great week!

Patrick




-- 
Patrick Durusau
Patrick@Durusau.net
Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005

Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!