Talk:Watermark (data file)

Untitled

The information information on the cited page is public domain, and it has been published in a magazine (Baldoza, A. and Sieffert, M. "Methods for Detecting Tampering in Digital Images." AFRL Technology Horizons®, vol 1, no 1 (Mar 00), 15-17.) The article is also marked "public release". The home page of the article is quoted, and there can be no doubt that it's a quote. The information contained in the article is not revolutionary science, it merely contains technical stuff about applications of watermarks and fingerprints ..

Indeed it is. Apologies, I missed that on the webpage. Tag removed and cleanup tag added. Tonywalton  | Talk 01:10, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

By the way, the homepage of the article is not quoted. Check what's actually in the http ref at the top. That's the title of the article, not its URL. Tonywalton  | Talk 01:13, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Proposal to merge with Digital Watermarking

I just noticed that there's a proposal to merge this page with Digital watermarking

I think that this is a bad idea for a number of reasons:

• Digital watermarking is the usual expression for referring to its subject
• Digital watermarking is usually understood to mean the embedding of a robust watermark, which is not the same as tamper-proofing, although they are related
• The subject Watermark (data file) sounds a bit silly, given that Digital Watermarking is probably a lot more topical and relevant to most readers than the old-fashioned form
• Although the Digital watermarking article is not at all comprehensive at the moment, it could be turned into a good one: there's nothing wrong with the subject

cojoco (talk) 21:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you. Digital Watermarking and this article are two different things. /Poxnar ^(talk) 12:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

This old unsupported merge proposal is hereby closed. Dicklyon (talk) 01:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)