Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 18:27:16 +0100
From: Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Selon Robert L Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> There is now a file called "exif-handling.txt" in devel-docs
> that summarizes my understanding, based on the exif
> specifications, of how an image editor is supposed to handle the
> exif data in a file. Of course we need not take the
> specifications as gospel (among other things, they specify that
> a proper EXIF file must have a file name in 8.3 format, ending
> in .JPG!), but they should serve as a good default.
> Adobe at least had an excuse with PPD files 10 years ago. There's no
> excuse for 8.3 any more.
Before people get high-horsey about this, consider that 90% of
digital cameras have embedded DOS as their OS, and are thus unable
to generate files which are not 8.3.
There's nothing wrong with digital cameras *creating* 8.3 files. The
problem is the *requirement* that EXIF files have 8.3 names. This
makes me concerned that some EXIF programs will gratuitously enforce
this requirement. There are PPD-using applications that choke on
non-conformant file names (or complain if the *PCFileName attribute is
missing or ill-formed).
Robert Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project lead for Gimp Print -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net
"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
Gimp-developer mailing list