I think that there are too many troubles with exposed inner workings of XnView. There are edit and browsing mode for displaying images, and working with metadata. Some things work different way if XnView is in one of this modes.
Are there any gains for users with these two modes?
Lack of "technical transparency"
Moderators: helmut, XnTriq, xnview
-
nightflyer
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:41 am
Lack of "technical transparency"
-=nightflyer=-
First, my point of view on Browser's fullscreen ("fullscreen lite") vs Viewer's fullscreen ("MDI fullscreen"): improve and use MDI as mainstream (keep "lite fullscreen" only for some 'dual monitor' configurations).
About the 'Direct File' vs 'Image loaded in memory' operations:
- for operations not related to the image itself (like: Metadata, Categories, Timestamp...), they should be available and performed in Viewer exactly like in Browser (ie: directly write on file. Don't manage them separately and don't overwrite those parts when saving image).
- for operations related to the image (like JPEG lossless operations), I think they should be available as long as the image has not been modified.
Does it make sense for you?
About the 'Direct File' vs 'Image loaded in memory' operations:
- for operations not related to the image itself (like: Metadata, Categories, Timestamp...), they should be available and performed in Viewer exactly like in Browser (ie: directly write on file. Don't manage them separately and don't overwrite those parts when saving image).
- for operations related to the image (like JPEG lossless operations), I think they should be available as long as the image has not been modified.
Does it make sense for you?
Olivier