Re: EXIF support in PNG

John Bowler <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.graphics.png.general
Message-ID <CAP7U398NBcjhfEhSsvt_RycSsLyCbX8JYRmoEfLoXCv_MLPV3Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Adam M. Costello <
png.amc+0-NbS3tD7h7f/[email protected]> wrote:

> Just an idea:  Define eXIF and eXIf to have the exact same syntax, but
> slightly different meaning:
>
> eXIf (safe-to-copy)
>
> eXIF (unsafe-to-copy)
>


> Either eXIf or eXIF may appear (at most once), but not both.


I considered that, but when I look at the camera data I have to hand
(mostly Point'n'Shoot cameras) it looks like they always put in something
that is imaged dependent and is genuinely useful just so long as no other
processing of the image data has happened.

I also agree with Glenn; it's not KISS and I think that however good the
instructions we give they will be ignored.

My reason for not saying eXIf+caveat emptor is that the rules for
discarding eXIF have been in PNG from the start and are, in this case,
correct.  Specifically an app can chose *not* to discard it if either it
knows there are no problematic EXIF tags or it chooses to remove them.

-- 
John Bowler <[email protected]>
+1 (541) 450-9885
PO BOX 3151
KERBY OR 97531-3151
USA

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most 
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot

_______________________________________________
png-mng-misc mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/png-mng-misc
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.