Add me to your list please.

I know that LR and other editors do not change the raw data and I have never claimed that they do.
The image viewers that I tried obviously are not capable of extracting info from the xmp files. My curiosity is now satisfied and I have no intention of switching from LR for my photo editing needs.
I do use dng files from time to time, but again almost all my viewing is done in LR.
Thanks for your comments.

You certainly have an extensive background in film photography, so I can see why your interpretation of the terms editing and post processing is different from mine (my experience is only in digital photography).
As I said in an earlier post, the majority of YouTube videos by photographers/educators (too many to list, but mostly familiar names) use the term editing. That doesn't make it any more correct than processing, but it is more commonly used.
It's good to have a civil discussion.

I probably use the terms interchangeably, but most of the time use editing to mean all the changes that I apply to an image with the sliders in LR, or the use of other tools such as cropping, straightening, transforming, spot removal, red eye reduction. etc. Very few people would have trouble understanding what I mean when I say I edit my photos in LR. But occasionally I will say post processing, and to me I am talking about the same changes to the image listed above.
There is definitely a blurring of any distinction between the two terms, but in my opinion it gets somewhat pedantic to absolutely insist on a restricted definition of either term - and I am not suggesting that you belong in that camp!
An interesting discussion.

That is certainly one valid interpretation of editing, but it isn't the only one. Terminology can be confusing at times can't it?
I would still maintain that most users of LR and similar programs talk about editing their photos to mean making changes to exposure, contrast, white balance, cropping, etc. Some people use the term processing to mean the same thing.
In the long run, does it really matter what we call it?

My initial post was driven by my curiosity about the ability, or lack thereof, of various image viewers to correctly view raw files that had accompanying sidecar xmp files. I understood fairly quickly that these viewers did not read the xmp files, and that should have been the end of it. However, as is often the case on UHH, we got off on a tangent talking about the terms editing and processing.

It's interesting that even Adobe refers to Lightroom (in all its iterations) as a photo editing app or image editing program. Most of the photographers/educators on YouTube talk about editing their (usually) raw photos with Lightroom or some other similar program.
One source that I read talks about editing as the more "technical" changes to things such as exposure, contrast, clarity, etc. In other words, moving the sliders around in LR to get a more pleasing result. He uses processing to refer to "creative" changes such as colour grading, adding sunflare, etc. That is obviously a useful distinction for him.

Regardless, I think it's somewhat hair-splitting to be concerned about the use of the words processing or editing - both terms get used, perhaps loosely and often interchangeably, but I think that most people understand what is being referred to by either word.
The other area where I see processing used more often is the steps involved in interpreting/converting the data in the raw file so that an image file is produced. Different apps process the raw data differently so the same raw file processed by Lightroom can apparently look slightly different from the result processed in say Capture One. The term "raw processor" is commonly used to describe the engine that processes the raw file into a viewable image.

I'm not really disagreeing with you User ID, I'm just saying that editing and processing are terms used by many people to describe the same actions - making changes to the image that shows on the screen, with of course the understanding that these changes are only applied when the file is exported as a jpeg or other format. Adobe also describes LR as a "nondestructive" editor (not processor) for that reason. I know, and I know that you also know, that the original raw file is untouched by all that editing/processing.

You are no doubt correct that there will now follow several pages of comments by the so-called experts who disagree with my comments.

I appreciate your comments.

I did say in an earlier post that I am well aware that the raw files are not changed, and that for specific camera manufacturer raw files there is an accompanying sidecar file containing the editing parameters. I know that these parameters are applied when exporting a file to jpeg or other format.
Having said that, everyone talks about editing photos in Lightroom, with the understanding that the original file is unchanged. If it isn't editing I don't know what it would be called.
As I also said, no further comments are necessary. My experiment is done!

Yes the latest version

As I said, I was just experimenting. I use Lightroom Classic to edit my photos, then export them as JPGs when and as needed.
This was nothing more than me messing around, it is not and was never intended to be anything other than that.
Thanks for the replies. No need for further comments.

That is normally what I do, but I was just experimenting with other photo viewers.

I edit my raw files in Lightroom Classic. I understand that the original files are not changed, and I know that the xmp files contain the instructions for the edits I carried out in LRC.
What is interesting is that Windows Photos recognizes some of the edits carried out in LRC, but omits the crop and red eye reduction.

I have an interesting problem viewing raw files edited in Lightroom Classic.
I am on Windows 10 and LRC, both up to date. The files in question are Fujifilm raf files which have been edited. The files all have accompanying xmp files.
If I try to view these files in their folder with a photo viewer, I get what I think are strange results.
With FastStone Image viewer, the edited raf files display as unedited files, so I assume that FS does not read the accompanying xmp files. IrfanView shows the files as partially edited, missing the crop and red eye reduction. Windows Photos is the same as IrfanView.
As an experiment, I converted the same files to dng files and repeated the procedure.
Both FS and Windows Photos showed the files correctly, but IrfanView was the same as before - the files appeared to be partially edited with the crop and red eye reduction missing.
I know that I don't have to view the files outside of Lightroom, but I find this behaviour odd. IrfanView, which I have used for years as a photo viewer, was the worst performer, showing either an unedited file or was missing the crop and red eye reduction.
Any thoughts?

Two of my pet peeves.
1. People who say/write "the number of cases are dropping" instead of "the number of cases is dropping". They don't seem to realize that it is the number that is dropping, not the cases.
2. Related to the singular/plural issue, I have heard this many times. "The criteria for success is ...", or "The total solar eclipse was a phenomena."
Whatever happened to subject/verb agreement? Of course in the second example, the writer/speaker doesn't even know that criteria and phenomena are plurals!

I will respectfully disagree with you about Terry White - he is not blowing smoke. I am a PC user, but that is irrelevant. There is absolutely nothing wrong with organizing a folder structure outside of Lightroom, then importing as shown in the video. That way you have absolute control of the naming of your folders and the method you use. Some people use dates, others use categories, but that is a personal choice. One is not necessarily better than the other. I use dates (year-month) to organize my folders outside of Lightroom (pre-importing), and I may have subfolders with categories if necessary. But I know that not everyone wants to do that.
I agree with you about Collections - I use them a lot, and I also use keywords. However, I don't suggest that people who use a different method are wrong. Choose whatever method you feel comfortable with. There is no one way of naming or importing that must be used by everyone.
One of the great things about Lightroom is that there isn't just one way of doing things, and Terry even said in his video that his method worked for him, and he would not criticize someone else for using another method.
I prefer my way of doing things, you prefer yours, but that doesn't mean that one of us is wrong.

Thanks Lev29
I will take a look at the webinar and see if it fits my needs. Your help is appreciated.
Fifer