The exif data is useful and we shold be encouraging editors to include it.
I use it when looking at copyright issues some of the most prolific
copyright infringers came unstuck because the variations in exif from one
photo to the next, likewise images with exif data removed are an indicator
of pote
On 8 December 2011 17:02, Tobias Oelgarte
wrote:
> Yes you are right. It only hits images with present EXIF data that has
> wrong rotation values. Therefore all images uploaded with wrong EXIF
> data have to be tagged by a template so that the bot can through the
> pages and correct the EXIF tag
Yes you are right. It only hits images with present EXIF data that has
wrong rotation values. Therefore all images uploaded with wrong EXIF
data have to be tagged by a template so that the bot can through the
pages and correct the EXIF tag to have the right value.
I'm counting myself to the luc
Just to understand - on the last thread about this, it sounded like
the October 5 update forces MediaWiki to determine rotation based on
EXIF data. If the EXIF data is wrong or missing, the rotation may be
incorrect. As a result, a bot (RotateBot) with a gigantic backlog is
slowly fixing incorrect
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:David_Gerard,_Heathrow_Terminal_5,_20110801_P1020447.jpg
Who thought this was a good idea to automate?
And how does one get this fixed? I can't even revert to a good copy.
Has a list of these been made and human-checked?
- d.
