- From: Chris Lilley <Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr>
- Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 23:04:36 +0100 (MET)
- To: "David Perrell" <davidp@earthlink.net>, <www-html@w3.org>, <www-style@w3.org>
On Nov 29, 7:19pm, David Perrell wrote: > I believe CGM (Computer Graphics Metafile) supports clipping paths. Yes. It calls the concept stencilling. > It > certainly can use bitmaps as texture fill, which is basically the same > thing. A CGM can contain vector graphics (e.g., polylines, yes, right from level 1 > ellipses, NURBS), in level 3 and 4. NURBS with trimming curves gives a considerable degree of expressive power (the ellipses, conic sections, etc can be considered mere syntactic sugar for NURBS) > raster graphics (e.g., tile array), and text.[1] Yes. The text suffers a bit from lack of downloadable fonts and is a little I18N challenged but is otherwise okay. > Postscript is a page description language; an EPS file is actually an > interpreted program. CGM is a graphics file format. CGM files require less > processing overhead to display. The old declarative vs procedural comparison again, which also implies that CGM is easier to read in, edit a bit, and save back out again. > They also require less bandwidth to move > around. I did a comparison of image formats as exports from CorelDRAW!. A > simple logo was 1.5k bytes as a CGM file. It was 24k as an EPS. Did this saving carry over to other files, or did you just test a single instance? -- Chris Lilley, W3C [ http://www.w3.org/ ] Graphics and Fonts Guy The World Wide Web Consortium http://www.w3.org/people/chris/ INRIA, Projet W3C chris@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93 +33 (0)4 93 65 79 87 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Sunday, 30 November 1997 17:05:16 UTC