Semicolons instead of commas when tagging images in PS, LR and BR

[Andre_27]

Hi 🙂

when tagging images in PS, LR or BR commas get converted automatically to semicolons.  My client needs commas as seperators for recognizing keywords to where the images will get uploaded.  Can I change that behaviour (automatically changing commas to semicolons, keeping commas)?

Thanks, BR Andre

[melissapiccone]

Are you exporting the keywords? Can you do a find/change on the text?

[Andre_27]

I do not export keywords, I just attach them to the files in Bridge/Photoshop. When doing that commas get converted to semicolons.  I checked capture one right now, and it turns out same thing at least within adobe software: keywords separate through semicolons always.

Actually, I think this is a non issue for me but for my client who somehow can't read semicolons as separators, but I want to exclude any bugs on my side of (software) usage..

thank you

[Andre_27]

I mean I defined keywords in capture one, opened the file in PS and there are always semicolons

[Stephen_A_Marsh · Accepted solution]

This is just display-related, different software uses different methods to show metadata.

Yes, Adobe uses semi-colons. So too does Windows file properties.

ExifTool shows a comma for the same file. So does the macOS Finder.

Apple Preview uses a line break.

Gimp, like Preview, uses separate lines without any "separator" visible.

Finally, looking at the underlying XMP metadata for DC:Subject you can see the raw structure:

<dc:subject>
    <rdf:Bag>
        <rdf:li>one</rdf:li>
        <rdf:li>two</rdf:li>
        <rdf:li>three</rdf:li>
    </rdf:Bag>
</dc:subject>

As a founding member of the MWG, Adobe software will also write the DC:Subject info to the legacy IPTC:Keywords metadata for compatibility with software that does not read to the current standard.

[Andre_27]

yeah thanks, as I suspected and you confirming this is actually a non issue except for some third party software not compatible to the standard. I'll forward this info to them. 

BR Andre

[Andre_27]

I think that third party software can't interpret separators correctly using the simicolons "proposed" by adobe and not being able to see them just as placeholders for separators. 

[Stephen_A_Marsh]

---

@Andre_27 wrote:

I think that third party software can't interpret separators correctly using the simicolons "proposed" by adobe and not being able to see them just as placeholders for separators. 

---

There are no semicolons or other characters separating individual keywords in XMP-dc:subject metadata. 

An incorrect entry may have one long keyword containing separators (I had to wrap the entire line in open/close " quote marks when entering it so that it would be considered a single keyword):

<dc:subject>
   <rdf:Bag>
      <rdf:li>incorrect; single; keyword; when; it;  should; be; multiple; keywords</rdf:li>
   </rdf:Bag>
</dc:subject>

Please post a sample image with metadata for verification, the image could be 1x1 px in size, it is only the metadata that is important.

I'm not sure how legacy IPTC metadata is structured "under the hood".

[Andre_27]

Thanks.  Attached you'll find a file.  Don't wonder why in Description Article Numbers are inserted, thats what they want/need for their system.  You said there are no semicolons whatsoever, and this is just a display issue, now I believe their system seems to be totally proprietary and somehow not compatible.

[Stephen_A_Marsh · Accepted solution]

@Andre_27 – All appears as expected:

<dc:subject>
<rdf:Bag>
    <rdf:li>Staub</rdf:li>
    <rdf:li>ceramic</rdf:li>
    <rdf:li>cherry blossom</rdf:li>
    <rdf:li>white truffle</rdf:li>
    <rdf:li>sage</rdf:li>
    <rdf:li>dining line</rdf:li>
    <rdf:li>plate</rdf:li>
    <rdf:li>15cm</rdf:li>
</rdf:Bag>
</dc:subject>

Each keyword is separate, different software will display the separate keywords differently. Adobe with semicolons, ExifTool with commas etc.

[Stephen_A_Marsh]

I have attached 3 modified versions of your files. I used ExifTool to remove the original subject and keyword metadata. I then re-wrote the subject/keywords to the "clean" files using ExifTool. This is purely as a test to see if your client has any different results with metadata generated in other software:

exiftool-subject.jpg = only subject metadata, no iptc keywords

exiftool-keywords.jpg = only legacy iptc keywords, no subject metadata

exiftool-both-subject-keywords.jpg = both forms of metadata

Don't open/resave these in Photoshop or other Adobe software (otherwise the metadata would be invalid for this test), just see how they are handled as is.

It will be interesting to see if your client has issues with these files.

Please do come back with the findings!

[Andre_27 · Accepted solution]

Hey Stephen,

sorry for the late answer, the mills grind slowly here.  The client said they'll tag metadata themselves after data delivery from my side without further notice of reasoning, which is cool because I don't have to deal with tagging anymore 🙂 and I don't feel inclined to dig deeper unless they want me to.  I believe they found out the obvious – their proprietary approach doesn't work with the XMP Standard, therefore it's best to tag within their system than not being able to correctly capture externally tagged files.

Thank you and best regards

Andre

[Stephen_A_Marsh]

A related topic below, where a script can copy the keywords using commas rather than the semicolons used in File > File Info

https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-ecosystem-ideas/please-use-commas-instead-of-semicolons-pho...