[its all about choice again :) ]

one script to add an image and leave a comment for this particular image as an fs attribute
second script to go through the directory, construct an HTML [tel it be so] index and put comments fetched from fs attributes underneath the image.

The good point is: you do not need to have a database [let it be SQL, text file or whatever else] to keep additional information about your images what makes it easier to move things aroung [ofcourse if you need it].

Let assume the old way – you have a directory with images and a text file with corresponding comments. Now, if you want to CRUD image – you need to adjust the txt file as well [not a big deal but still]. And what if you need to move an image from one directory of your gallery to another one? This will look like this [assuming old way]: open txt file in old dir -> remove remove image comment -> close txt file -> move image to new directory -> open txt file in that directory -> add image comment -> close file.
Using fs attributes you can simply copy the image to new directory :)

Anyway – this is all about choice :) It is good to have choice [and it is important to know about it's availability as well]

so… :) I understood this. I think I feel irritation at making tags much faster than with dependant on the database.

IMO it looks interesting but uncomfortable and useless – gadget. Probably because I do not have tasks to use this.

Ok. Are you going (Leonid, Alex, anybody) to use that constantly for something? If you say yes I’ll take on trust and change my mind. :)

as an example, you can tag images with keywords. This way, you will be able to do searches in your image directories without being dependant on the database.