Vivien Lacourba wrote: > > Hi PNGs, > > Here are some comments about the PNG Specification. > > Regards, > Vivien > > -- > Vivien Lacourba - W3C Webmaster MIT/LCS > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: http://www.w3.org/TR/ > Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 09:24:38 -0400 > Resent-From: Vivien Lacourba <vivien@w3.org> > Resent-To: "web-human@w3.org" <web-human@w3.org> > Date: 02 Jun 2003 15:25:55 +0200 > From: "Susan Foord" <susan.foord@ntlworld.com> > Organization: W3C > To: <web-human@w3.org> > > Hello W3C people > > I had just started reading the PNG specification and in both your current > document (REC-png) and your new proposed one (2003/PR-PNG-20030520/) there > is an error in the section describing bit depth of colours: "not the total > pixel size" should be "not the total bit size" as it has to do with the > number of bits required to specify the colour value (R, G and B) in a table > in the file rather than the displayed size of the pixel (eg dpi resolution). > > There may be more errors but I haven't read it all yet! I wanted to know if > this was even remotely the correct address for reporting such things. > > Susan Foord Hi, Susan. You can use "png-group@w3.org" in the future. I agree that readers might possibly confuse "pixel size" with "resolution". Your solution looks a little confusing as well. How about "not the total number of bits per pixel" ? Thanks GlennReceived on Monday, 2 June 2003 11:58:48 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 6 May 2023 17:27:37 UTC