Re: CALL for DISCUSSION: eXIf 20170115

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Willem van Schaik <[email protected]> wrote:
> why updating the chunk proposal before any serious discussion has
> happened ??

I raised the point before Glenn wrote the formal proposal, no one
expressed an opinion (beyond my original one, which was pretty much a
non-opinion).

So an opinion was expressed and that has to tip the balance.  No one
else said anything one way or another.

On balance I prefer it without the JPEG ID which was there only to
resolve the issue with JPEG APP markers being, of themselves,
unidentifiable.  It all seems logical to me; the JPEG ID becomes the
PNG chunk ID, the marker length becomes the PNG chunk length, the
data, the real payload, is as in JPEG.

Precisely what goes on in TIFF, the only other supported EXIF format,
is irrelevant because TIFF is the native format of EXIF; JPEG is a
non-native format and so is PNG.

John Bowler

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