Re: DRAFT: eXIF 2017-05-28

Glenn Randers-Pehrson <[email protected]> Tue, 30 May 2017 07:03:12 -0400
Newsgroups gmane.comp.graphics.png.general
Message-ID <CA+PdXcsD0j61vb6XqmaetKMd1NsJ+y2_34jKS2wZj9L3hpOy6g@mail.gmail.com>
Just to be clear, I too greatly prefer eXIf (safe-to-copy) over
eXIF (unsafe-to-copy) because it does a better job of preserving
valuable historical information.  Approval of eXIf wouldn't
require applications such as pngcrush/optipng to do anything
new, while eXIF would require them to issue a new version
to handle eXIF as if it were safe-to-copy when it's not
making changes that would render that information
incorrect.

If you like, you may consider the eXIF proposal to be a
strawman designed to resurrect the discussion of eXIf,
which is still an active proposal despite discussion
having lapsed.

Glenn

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