https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6672

--- Comment #32 from Saibo <[email protected]> 2011-10-05 13:45:25 UTC ---
More test results:
* IE9  (on Vista) doesn't rotate based on EXIF.
* Safari5 (on Vista) doesn't, too.

"In fact, it seems like there shouldn’t even be the option to specify rotation
in EXIF!"
[http://pleaselistencarefully.com/Why-photo-rotation-is-broken-on-the-iphone-4-and-how-to-fix-it-using-paperclip-on-heroku
pleaselistencarefully.com] November 16th, 2010
* "AFAIK Firefox ignores EXIF information, and IMHO it probably should by
default because it could potentially lead to undesirable affects."
[http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1352155 Bluefang] July 13th,
2009
Browser bugreport:
* [http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=56845 current chromium
bug]

At least we know that the EXIF rotation stuff is ugly. Ugly by design since
older/basic tools able to decode and display jpeg do not understand EXIF. Then
EXIF was added and used to apply a transformation which is really important -
but ignored by all older/basic tools. Since today images are pushed directly
from cams to browsers we have a problem.  A safe approach would be: simply do
not use the broken-by-design EXIF rotation. 
This means: if we display the thumbs rotated by EXIF we also need to rotate the
full size server-side to be compatible with browsers (currently: all!).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to