RE: [PEAR-DEV] JPEG Metadata Package
| From: | Patrick O'Lone | Date: | Mon, 05 May 2003 21:21:41 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PEAR-DEV] JPEG Metadata Package | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-15915@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
May I look at Image_JPEG? Perhaps the IPTC code can be merged and
Image_JPEG could inherit from Image_IPTC.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sebastian Delmont [mailto:sdelmont@zonageek.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 05, 2003 4:13 PM
> To: pear-dev@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PEAR-DEV] 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.
> >
>
>
> --
> PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>