Although very few cameras support Content Credentials (C2PA) yet, it is a fundamental new norm for authentication of photos and therefore Photolab and all of DxO tools should be made compatible, so that image files don’t loose their C2PA metadata after being processed using DxO apps. Adobe is one step ahead because they are part of the original consortium that defined this norm.
… so that is what you are going to do to handle these work flows? 
Sounds very streamlined and effective.
Why not urging DXO adapting to the definition like all the other thousands of companies and organisations that are working har d now in order to be good members of this community?
I don´t know why you are writing this Joanna?
For me it feels like it is close to trolling.
Content Authenticity Initiative
You can just read this: C2PA User Experience Guidance for Implementers :: C2PA Specifications
I think reading just this shows how much there is to take in and understand, so I dont´t think we need and more desinformation about this. It is perfectly understandable that the users will need a user dialog around this in order to be able to act as good C2PA-users and because of that we definitely need DXO to wake up now if they don´t want to be considered totally irrelevant of all their users who might want to be part of these work flows without screwing them up because of a non C2PA-compliant software like Photolab.
3. Levels of information disclosure
My present main camera A7 IV is C2PA-compliant and so will the next version of PhotoMechanic be. Both were used when Associated Press teamed up with Sony in order to create a C2PA-compliant work flow. I guess they use Lightroom in that work flow. Personally I hope both Capture One and DXO realise that they have to face these new demands both from the news industry and all their users in order not leaving a total walk over to Adobe. Because for this market segment - not breaking the chain - that is what it will all boil down to and for the moment Lightroom doesn´t but both Photolab and Capture One do for the time being and neither of these companies seem to have waken up to realise they will have to address these issues, if they intend to stay relevant for a great deal of photographers publishing their images for a picture authenticy and provenance aware public.
So Joanna, do you really still think your suggestion is a good idea?
As you can see in this link you are not the first to lift these issues:
Don´t miss to read Carl Siebert text on Leica and C2PA.
Thanks @Stenis . I have read your well-documented post from January and even linked to it in my initial post, but it was not tagged as “Feature Request” and therefore I’m concerned it can’t be voted-up and might escape the attention of DxO development team.
Thanks @Joanna . Your reply here is also a reply to the other Feature request I posted today asking for more control on editing metadata from within Photolab. I came to Photolab because I felt it is most successful at offering a one-stop shop for processing photos (why Adobe keeps Lightroom and Photoshop separate is beyond me). So using different apps, no matter how clever and free and open sources they might be, is really something I’d rather do without.
I voted for your text instead