If that’s her point, she can make it. If it’s your point, I don’t find it useful. Joanna can do it, I can do it, DxO could do it. So what? It’s not about difficulty, it’s about priority. If DxO decides to prioritize this feature, they won’t have any trouble implementing it.
That’s exactly the point. DxO seems to be not specially keen on features that go beyond developing (a limited set of) RAW images. Both you and Joanna have proven that keyword management can be done … but DxO has other priorities to handle with a small team.
Do you mean import a list of structured or flat keywords or do you mean building a structure based on the used keywords on all the pictures IPTS/XMP-metadata?
As I see it it is for example not possible to import my Keyword Vocabularies / Thesauruses from my PhotoMechanic- or iMatch-programs BUT Photolab has been able to manage to build even structured keywords and a list over them for years at the same time as you index all your pictures in order to build your PictureLibrary-database.
What it can´t do but ought to be able to is to import and export the keyword-list / Thesaurus (structured or not). Every serious DAM-solution har features like that in order to make it possible for the users to migrate to and from those systems. Not providing a solution for that can´t be seen these days as anything else than a way to lock people in or as a sign of a non-mature and/or a non-professional photo-DAM-solution.
Yes, there is no other company what I know about than Photools /iMatch DAM) that really has a totally comprehensive solution for handling all issues one can think of concerning the handling of keywords. They even do it in an environment where it is possible to protect the integrity of a “controlled vocabulary” (if that is your wish) regardless if it produces a flat or structured list of keywords despite these keywords are even automatically generated by AI with image analyzis.
Photools that builds iMatch is a one-man company. So, this is NOT about resources. It is about listening to the users wishes and demands, development efficiency, keeping a steady focus on the tasks and keeping the commitment over time alive. Not even Adobe with their multi billions and their houndreds or thousands of developers, has managed to fix any thing in Lightroom that Mario Westphal has built by his own in iMatch.
Maybee even Yoanna should take a look at that masterpiece, because it is just stunning.
Personally I salut what DXO has done in version 9. I did not see that coming where they had really nothing of AI-supported masking and editing and as I see it has built the probably best AI-masking platform there is in any other RAW-converter on the market. So I am very happy the way they have prioritized what they have done.
Fixing the import-export of Thesaurus-data to and from Photolab just can´t be anything for those guys who built the new AI-tools in version 9 and integrated them so beautifully the way they have done it with the older Local Adjustment-tools.
It is also the case that Photolab according to my own experiences, is the RAW-converter that scales and integrates best with external Picture-DAM-softwares like PhotoMechanic and iMatch. Especially iMatch has very good migration tools to support a migration from Photolab to iMatch, so everything doesn´t even have to be solved by DXO when it comes to import and export of keyword-data.
When we who use PhotoMechanic or iMatch or something else updates the metadata in those applications that metadata can be seen in a second in Photolab too.
The only thing you need to do to get that to happen is to put a checkmark in a checkbox under the Metadata-tab in the Preferences-menu in Photolab. When it comes to keyword-structures I don´t think there is any other software that respects the metadata-standards around keywords better than iMatch. Certainly not either PhotoMechnic or Adobe Lightroom.
I have said it before Photolab and iMatch is a blessed marriage. The best RAW-converter married to the best and most versatile and polished DAM (that really is a DAM that even can handle PDF-files and Office-documents). I would very much see a tighter cooperation between DXO and Photools because there is a lot of synergies between Photolab and iMatch and both has also in common being affordable and non-subscription software.