- From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 20:40:44 +0000 (GMT)
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> plug-in/application such as WinZip or any other tool that is not > involved in multimedia? Note that WinZip is not free, in a money sense, software. There are free command line tools for handling modern ("flate" compression) .zip files. .zip actually originated with pkzip (not free). Your assumption of WinZip shows how Windows has dominated everything. I would be tempted to to generalise the GPL rule on distribution media. They say that the source code must be provided on media customarily used for the distribution of source code. I would say that if .zip files are the customary format for distributing the resource in question, then you don't need to provide a tool. If that is not the case, why are you using the format? Note that HTTP/1.1 supports the use of same compression algorithm used in modern .zip files on the actual HTTP data stream. Note that zip is not a standard format for Unix, although the free implementation will run on it. Best practice for Unix files that are not OS specific is to use .tar.gz. If the files are equally relevant to Microsoft users, a site will also include .zip files. If they are being really good, and the files are relevant to the Macintosh, they will also provide stuffit files (source code for Macs is relatively rare as it was not marketed as a user programmed system). Commercial Unices generally don't have gzip as standard, but free software users are likely to have it; if you are targetting something other than open source software at users of commercial Unices, you need to use .tar.Z as your lowest common denominator. Note that .zip is quite often used with no advantage, except possibly to fool firewalls, and web servers that haven't had their MIME Types configured properly. People don't seem to realise that PDF is compressed already and will zip a single PDF file; this is something that particularly annoys me, as it converts a resource that can be viewed directly (and even incrementally) into one that needs to be downloaded and then extracted. There is some gain, but it is not that great. Zipping a single .gif or .jpeg is pointless, and zipping Windows installers is also not very productive. This also works the other way; if you provide multimedia material in a format that is not supported by many operating systems, you will be locking people out or promoting Microsoft. > Content-Type: text/html; 140 lines of semi-proprietory Word 2000 gibberish deleted.
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 16:50:01 UTC