The library is free, easy to understand, and runs everywhere (or
could be ported with minimal effort). Additionally, it supports
multiple compression schemes, alpha, etc, etc.
-tim
Begin forwarded message:
From: khare@xent.caltech.edu (Rohit Khare)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 18:51:43 -0800
To: WebStep@mail.xent.caltech.edu
Subject: Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENT: .htmld format
Reply-To: khare@caltech.edu
I am forwarding bbums comments to the list. I, too, would like to
move the WebStep community past GIF, but that's not a practical
vision for the Web as a whole. Also, I doubt jpeg is the right
answer for imaged text (even in lossless mode).
Rohit
PS. A reminder: post submissions to WebStep@mail.xent.caltech.edu.
You need the "mail" part.
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 20:37:00 -0600
From: Bill Bumgarner <bbum@friday.com>
Subject: Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENT: .htmld format
To: khare@CALTECH.EDU
Cc: WebStep@xent.caltech.edu
Reply-to: bbum@friday.com
Message-id: <199502070237.UAA00925@friday.com>
X-Envelope-to: khare@cco.caltech.edu
MIME-version: 1.0 (NeXT Mail 3.3 v116.1)
Content-type: text/plain
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-A: I ride tandem with the random...
X-B: ...things don't run the way I plan them.
Wow! Cool RFC -- looks like things are moving in the right
direction. I had one comment:
# * GIF or XBM inlined images
Considering that GIF has been killed by patent abuse (BTW: It was
NOT Compu$erve's fault -- they are such an easy target for an abuse,
but don't deserve it in this case -- it was Unisys (i think -- some
UniXXX company, anyway), should the Spec really call for GIF as the
only alternative to XBM?
How about JPEG? Netscape, et al. deal well with that. OmniWeb
does an okay job w/OmniImageFilter (or similar) installed -- though
it does die on large images (OIF seems awfully slow in comparison to
the independent jpeg group's command-line utility "djpeg", but OIF
uses the JPEG group's library -- must have something to do
w/mach-messaging).
Too bad fractal/wavelet compression is not more popular; wavelet
allows for automatic resolution improvement if one is willing to
wait for an image to transfer; fractal allows for that + the
ability to decompress to an arbitrary resolution.
[btw: i found some fractal de/compression resources at:
http://inls.ucsd.edu/y/Fractals/
]
b.bum