[KPhotoAlbum] More patches

Robert Krawitz rlk at alum.mit.edu
Sat Aug 29 16:28:39 BST 2015

On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 16:25:51 +0200, Johannes Zarl-Zierl wrote:
> On Friday 28 August 2015 22:21:13 Robert Krawitz wrote:
>> >>> Also, the canonHack thing isn't the right way to go about it; other
>> >>> cameras may return bogus values.  Those need to be detected and
>> >>> ignored.
>> >> 
>> >> How do you propose we detect arbitrary bogus values?
>> > 
>> > The most obvious to me is that if LensType looks like an integer with
>> > no translation, that we keep looking for Lens and LensModel.  Having
>> > something meaningful is better than not.  Certainly, however, -1 looks
>> > like a default/error value; it's never going to be translatable.
> I'd normally prefer to be conservative about classification of unknown data, but I guess it's not gonna hurt to classify this value as 'generic' by default.

This one really is a special case.

> For random non-interpreted values, I'd prefer, say '(1234)' over 'Generic lens', because it allows diagnostic (i.e. it gives enough information so that an informed used can file a bug with exiv2).
> How about we replace '(65535)' with 'Generic/unknown' and add the focal length information to all non-interpreted values?
> I.e.:
> '(65535)' -> 'Generic/unknown 30-50 mm'
> '(1234)' -> '(1234) 30-50 mm'

That's an excellent idea.

>> Have you had a chance to think about these suggestions?
> Not yet. I just revisited the source code and your mail and wrote my thoughts.

Robert Krawitz                                     <rlk at alum.mit.edu>

***  MIT Engineers   A Proud Tradition   http://mitathletics.com  ***
Member of the League for Programming Freedom  --  http://ProgFree.org
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton

More information about the Kphotoalbum mailing list