Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-06 Thread David Neary
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 10:36:50PM +0100, Sven Neumann wrote: > David Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > That was my general idea. I can see that it has disadvantages (as > > you mention, back-compatibility and needing to do lots of stuff > > in the core are two). That parasites are supported i

Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-04 Thread pcg
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 10:36:50PM +0100, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The possibility to save the data indepently of the image format in a > separate file a good idea but doesn't speak against using parasites > for metadata. In fact, it's trivial to implement another Load/Save-Plug-

Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-04 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, David Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That was my general idea. I can see that it has disadvantages (as > you mention, back-compatibility and needing to do lots of stuff > in the core are two). That parasites are supported in XCF is > something of a red herring - as Sven's been at pains

Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-04 Thread David Neary
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 07:07:23PM +0100, Raphael Quinet wrote: > On Tue, 04 Dec 2001, Dave Neary wrote: > > That has been thought of, and I don't think that one metadata > > structure rules that out. In a way, it's just one bucket in which > > we store the various pieces of information. Of course

Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-04 Thread Raphael Quinet
On Tue, 04 Dec 2001, Dave Neary wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:32:18PM +0100, Raphael Quinet wrote: > > Some time ago, I submitted two bug reports about this: > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56443 (EXIF and metadata) > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61499 (editi

Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-04 Thread Raphael Quinet
On Tue, 04 Dec 2001, Nick Lamb wrote: > Maybe I said this before, I can't remember, but "the standard" for trying > to describe generic metadata is Dublin Core. So before burning too much > midnight oil trying to organise metadata into neat categories at least > type "Dublin Core" into a searc

Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-04 Thread Dave Neary
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:32:18PM +0100, Raphael Quinet wrote: > Well, it is good that you posted that information to the list, because > I also started working on that problem although I have a slightly > different point of view. Instead of considering only the EXIF format, > I decided to inves

Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-04 Thread Nick Lamb
Maybe I said this before, I can't remember, but "the standard" for trying to describe generic metadata is Dublin Core. So before burning too much midnight oil trying to organise metadata into neat categories at least type "Dublin Core" into a search engine. Even if one decided that DC itself was i

Re: [Gimp-developer] EXIF and Gimp parasites (was: Current work)

2001-12-04 Thread Raphael Quinet
On Tue, 04 Dec 2001, Dave Neary wrote: > So I've been pretty quiet for several months now, and I recently > nailed my flag to the mast, picked somethign from the TODO and > started working on it. It's the Image metadata object item, which > grew out of a desire to get the data out of the EXIF