On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 2:46 AM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote:

> The problem here stemms from that orientation data lives as "metadata"
> in the EXIF data of image formats. This means that many tools has
> simply ignored that metadata.
> The result seems to have been that people open their images in tools
> that ignore the EXIF metadata. Then rotates the pixel data using that
> tool. Then saves the image again while keeping the EXIF metadata
> unchanged.
> This now means the pixels have been rotated (say) 90 degrees, but the
> EXIF metadata still says "rotate image 90 degrees". So any tool that
> now honors the EXIF renders the picture *wrong*.
> So effectively the EXIF metadata has to be ignored in order to keep
> webcompat. That was the case even before image-orientation was
> implemented.
> FWIW I believe that WebP is remaking this same mistake. Would be cool
> if someone tried to prevent this from happening.

The question was "why is this a CSS style instead of a property on <img>",
not "why isn't this just the default".

Glenn Maynard

Reply via email to