Re: JPEG Metadata Package

Having seen the source on CVS, It looks like Image_IPTC is a wrapper for the iptcparse/iptcembed functions (which were badly in need of some wrappers to simplify their usage). My package is a full parser/generator of JPEG files. A lot of the code can be reused to parse TIFF and PSD files, but that hasn't been done yet. So... is it fair to say that Image_IPTC and Image_JPEG (or whatever the final name is) should be separate packages? * It would be imposible to add the functionality of Image_JPEG to Image_IPTC. * Image_JPEG already provides all the functionality of Image_IPTC. * I don't think Image_JPEG should replace Image_IPTC. Image_IPTC might be faster if all you need is access to IPTC parsing. In the future, I (or someone else) might implement Image_TIFF and Image_PSD, using a similar interface as Image_JPEG. Once that is done, we could have Image_Metadata as a factory object that would create the appropiate subclass, but I don't think we should worry about that for now (besides having it in mind). I'm aware that most of my code would greatly benefit of being ported to C; but I don't have the time to do it, and the current performance is more than enough for my needs. And I think a lot of people who can't recompile their binaries would love to have it as PHP library instead of C. Martin Jansen wrote:

On Mon May 05, 2003 at 02:2757PM -0400, Sebastian Delmont wrote:

Can you, as a first step, perhaps have a look at Image_IPTC and summarize, how the packages differ?

I would... if Image_IPTC would have been released. I didn't noticed that when I first saw it on the packages database.

You can browse the source code at http://cvs.php.net/cvs.php/pear/Image_IPTC.