Re: DRAFT: eXIF 2017-05-28

Allowing Exif00 to be present but ignorable would have made
the ImageMagick/GraphicsMagick implemation a little
simpler, because those bytes are included in the "image->profile"
for Exif in IM/GM.  But skipping them (and restoring them when
recreating image->profile) isn't really a big deal.

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Phil Harvey <phil-CIeU6mJ2MbMd166Dz3SrqbDks+cytr/[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks Glenn,
>
> The new draft looks good.
>
> To address one of Pavel's comments:
>
>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 8:36 AM, Pavel Zlatovratskii <[email protected]> wrote:
>> About simple conversions to/from APP1, we might want to admit the
>> possiblility that the 6-byte Exif00 might be present
>
> I don't think this is necessary since the draft specifically states the chunk should begin with "II" or "MM".  However, as a test I have implemented this check and it doesn't add much of an extra burden to the decoder, so I don't feel too strongly about this.
>
>         - Phil
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

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