Re: Package Proposal: Image_JPEG

On Tue, 06 May 2003 17:42:27 -0400 Sebastian Delmont <sdelmont@zonageek.com> wrote: > Both packages are valuable... each one has a different set of > requirements, and each one provides a different level of performance. > I think a good comparison would be str_replace() vs. preg_replace(). > One is more powerful, the other is faster and simpler... you get to > decide which one to use according to your needs. I do not like anymore str_replace & preg comparaison ;). > Image_JPEG would provide much more than what Image_IPTC does. A lot > more. So in terms of functionality, it could replace it. But for that > same reason, it is a lot slower. And there is no way of doing > Image_JPEG as fast as Image_IPTC. So I believe both packages could > co-exist without problems. I understand the differences, but I'm still for a single package ( btw nice work :) ). Image_JPEG should be, at least, Image_IPTC_JPEG, or something like that, as a sub class of Image_IPTC. I do not see any good reason to have 2 packages to work with IPTC, this is not the same situation as we may have with others packages like templates. pierre