At 04:29 AM 6/21/2006, Øyvind Kolås wrote:
The scope and aim for designing the format is unclear. I think the
goal of the initial version of the format should be exchange of
layered images. Extra bells and whistles, for efficienct or arcane
features, that might be desireable to serialize the entire state of an
application should not be part of the initial core standard.
I agree 110%!!!!!!
My rationale for wanting JPEG data is the ability to exchange
compressed "preview" versions of a document, with the structure
intact.
As I noted in a previous message - I
agree that JPEG for a preview/thumbnail image is
just fine. For not for actual layer data.
The biggest problem with JPEG is that it doesn't support an alpha channel.
True, but then the authoring application could choose PNG instead...
Reusing existing single layer raster formats for the layers have
advantages. PNG is a good candidates since it supports RGB an
grayscale, with and witthout alpha in 8 and 16bit and is widely
supported.
The only other viable alternative is
JPEG2000, which also supports CMYK and other
colorspaces as well as better compression,
etc. Unfortunately, it is also harder to
implement, heavier weight, and many consider it
potentially patent encumbered - though there are
some acceptable open source implementations.
Leonard
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Rosenthol <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Chief Technical Officer <http://www.pdfsages.com>
PDF Sages, Inc. 215-938-7080 (voice)
215-938-0880 (fax)
_______________________________________________
CREATE mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
