- From: Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 15:07:01 +0100
- To: Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>
- Cc: liam@w3.org, robert@ocallahan.org, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, W3C CSS Mailing List <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACj=BEi=Nb=JdrgE5_5cOcWh4GSONWApR_EV9aTgDd78B0NTGQ@mail.gmail.com>
A common abbreviation for "jpeg2000" is "j2k". Otherwise, you left out "apng" (again :) ) from the list. Regarding format variants (such as JPEG with arithmetic coding, currently not supported by any browser, can provide files that are 10% smaller on average), will there be some convention for their naming? Will each variant added require a spec change? We should aim to prevent a situation where browsers add their own, conflicting names for the same format variant. Will we need vendor prefixes for that? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>wrote: > Thinking about bmp, tiff, tga, eps again, I'm not sure there's a > use-case there. True, they're supported by some software (eg Prince), > but if you're using them you tend to be writing for a specific UA, so > you don't really need format negotiation. Is that fair to say? > > If so, we could stick with the formats likely to be negotiated across > the web, namely: > > webp > mpo (3d format support by DS browser) > jxr (jpeg xr, supported in IE) > jpeg2000 > > With the following thrown in for compatibility: > > gif > jpeg > png > svg > > Jake. > > On 18 February 2013 22:07, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 09:50 +1300, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com > >wrote: > >> > >> > mpo (3d format support by DS browser) > >> > > >> bmp > >> > > >> tiff > >> > eps > >> > > >> > >> Is there any significant use of these formats on the Web, or any reason > to > >> start using them? > > > > Maybe someone at Google or Microsoft would have an answer to that. > > > > I'm not aware of any Web browser that handles Tiff natively today, but > > the format is used in the print world, and likely to grow in the future > > (unfortunately, since TIFF is a mess). It's the most widely interchanged > > lossless multi-layer format other than (proprietary) psd -- something > > needed for printing in colour (typically CMYK layers). I'd be happy to > > encourage use of something else (MNG?) but there isn't really a > > substitute right now. > > > > BMP is default for Microsoft Paint, or used to be, and one still > > encounters them sometimes. > > > > Liam > > > > > > -- > > Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ > > Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ > > Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2013 14:07:38 UTC