I think now, in 2010s most of internet content is made by regular users, not
webdevs. Can we look at the problem from their perspective? Of course, CDNs and
webdevs care about MIME types and Accept headers, but regular users know
nothing about that and they've been happily posting apngs to Tumbl
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:56 AM Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Mike Lawther
> wrote:
> >> I'm testing the water here :) Is this at all likely to fly?
> >
> > I think the problem with APNG, as opposed to ot
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Mike Lawther wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:56 AM Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Mike Lawther
>> > wrote:
>> >> I'm testing the water here :) Is this at all likel
On 22/02/16 14:58, Xidorn Quan wrote:
> But older Firefoxes go away fairly quickly, so I wouldn't consider
> this as a valid reason blocking us moving forward.
I'm not sure that's as true as we'd like it to be :-|
Gerv
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev
In my last commercial project 2 month ago I used APNG in the iconography of
my Firefox Add-on.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016, 20:56 Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Mike Lawther
> wrote:
> >> I'm testing the water h
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Mike Lawther
> wrote:
>> I'm testing the water here :) Is this at all likely to fly?
>
> I think the problem with APNG, as opposed to other image formats,
> e.g., WebP, is that we already support it. If
What if, in the future:
1. Safari fully supports
2. This bug lands https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1160200
Then it would be possible for web-developers to just use this, right?
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Mike Lawther
> wrote:
>> I'm testing the water here :) Is this at all likely to fly?
>
> I think the problem with APNG, as opposed to other image formats,
> e.g., WebP, is that we already support it. I
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Mike Lawther wrote:
> I'm testing the water here :) Is this at all likely to fly?
I think the problem with APNG, as opposed to other image formats,
e.g., WebP, is that we already support it. If we added APNG to our
Accept header now, and developers would start re
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 21/02/16 14:30, maxste...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Here's interesting live example, this website provides lots of
>> animated cursors to download, and they show them online as APNGs in
>> Firefox and Safari, and as GIFs in other browsers. Cu
On 21/02/16 14:30, maxste...@gmail.com wrote:
> Here's interesting live example, this website provides lots of
> animated cursors to download, and they show them online as APNGs in
> Firefox and Safari, and as GIFs in other browsers. Cursor's ANI
> format is 32bit and animated, but it's not support
Here's interesting live example, this website provides lots of animated cursors
to download, and they show them online as APNGs in Firefox and Safari, and as
GIFs in other browsers. Cursor's ANI format is 32bit and animated, but it's not
supported by browsers, so they have to convert.
One such
On 18 February 2016 at 15:38, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:08:12AM +1100, Mike Lawther wrote:
> > Hi Mozilla developers!
> >
> > tl,dr; can Firefox send an Accept-Encoding heading for APNG?
> >
> > I'm an engineer at Google working on Chrome. We're considering support
> for
> >
On 18/02/16 07:45, Jeff Muizelaar wrote:
> Is there a response to the criticism of Accept outlined here:
> https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Why_not_conneg#Negotiating_by_format
As Guardian of the Accept Header, that would be my question too.
Using Accept to detect APNG support will never be reliable
Is there a response to the criticism of Accept outlined here:
https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Why_not_conneg#Negotiating_by_format
-Jeff
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Mike Lawther wrote:
> Hi Mozilla developers!
>
> tl,dr; can Firefox send an Accept-Encoding heading for APNG?
>
> I'm an engineer
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 12:08 AM, Mike Lawther wrote:
> Is this something we can coordinate on?
Do you mean the Accept header? Not sure how Accept-Encoding makes sense here.
As for the MIME type to mention there, as I said in the bug I think we
should just ship image/apng (or video/apng though t
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:08:12AM +1100, Mike Lawther wrote:
> Hi Mozilla developers!
>
> tl,dr; can Firefox send an Accept-Encoding heading for APNG?
>
> I'm an engineer at Google working on Chrome. We're considering support for
> APNG.
>
> To support APNG, we think it's important for web deve
17 matches
Mail list logo
