fix for reading jpeg-xr images

[dimin]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1919 (774be70) into main (7d2eb4a) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 50.00%.

❗ Current head 774be70 differs from pull request most recent head 45fe046. Consider uploading reports for the commit 45fe046 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1919      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   61.13%   61.13%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          96       96              
  Lines       19051    19052       +1     
  Branches     9729     9729              
==========================================
  Hits        11647    11647              
  Misses       5090     5090              
- Partials     2314     2315       +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/tiffimage_int.cpp	79.12% <50.00%> (-0.44%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7d2eb4a...45fe046. Read the comment docs.

[kmilos]

Thanks. Would you also be able to add a test case for this please?

[kevinbackhouse]

@dimin: Thanks for the bug fix! Please could you add a test image for this? Adding a test is quite easy: you just need to add an image file to test/data and a python script to tests/bugfixes/github. Here's a link to a recent example.

[postscript-dev]

Please can you make a very minor change to the manpage, in the FILE TYPE section. Simply add an extra row to the table for JPEG-XR, and explain what features are supported. Thanks.

[dimin]

Added the JPEG-XR format to the manpage. I can also contribute a test file but would prefer if you guys could add a test case for it?

[kmilos]

Sorry, thinking about this some more, I think we should probably take this out to a proper new format and source file, like the other TIFF-derived formats (see ORF, RW2), rather than just simply piggy-backing TIFF base classes.

I'm afraid there might be more to JPEG-XR the container than just the header difference...

[kevinbackhouse]

I see that @dimin added a test file in a separate PR: #1946

[piponazo]

Hi guys. Should we get this merged as it is so that we have at least the minimum functionality needed by the contributor?

[kmilos]

I'd prefer to handle it as other TIFF derivatives.

[piponazo]

I'd prefer to handle it as other TIFF derivatives.

I totally agree that this should be the end goal, as you said there might be more to JPEG-XR the container than just the header difference. On the other hand it is difficult to ask for a new contributor to undertake such task since it will take a considerable amount of time. And this change is actually enabling the parsing of JPEG-XR files for him (and probably other potentially interested people).

What about doing the following?

• Accept & merge this change
• Creating a new test file in a separated PR with the test file provided at JPEG-XR test file #1946. I can take care of that.
• Open a new issue to implement the support for JPEG-XR in a separate class and investigate what else we would need to have a proper support for that format. (This issue could be taken by anybody interested in the topic).

IMHO that would be a pragmatic & realistic approach.

[kmilos]

Ok, let's go with that approach, we just need to make sure we don't forget what needs to be removed later.

[piponazo]

I created 2 issues. I'll work on the test case when I have some time 😉