On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:07:01 +0100
ACE <a.mad.coder_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
Hey ACE,
> Imagine publishing the slides with farbfeld images to the public.
if you had read the responses more carefully, you would have seen that
the plan is not to store plain farbfeld files in the talk-folder, but
rather use farbfeld only as an internal format to make the code simpler
and use the farbfeld-tools for conversion.
> I don't see farbfeld as a viable format to publish data today. I'm not
> hating on the farbfeld format, it just doesn't seem like it will get
> the widespread adoption to be a viable format to use when publishing
> data.
The spec is not even a week old. What do you expect? :P
> I would compare farbfeld with *.xdoc format; my machines currently have
> no way of opening them. My current process of opening *.xdoc documents
> involves borrowing a pc with MS word on it and convert it to PDF.
> Why insist on obfuscating the data? (as in lack of support of using the
> farbfeld format)
actually, we are not obfuscating the data. the problem is that libpng
is almost impossible to use properly in a C-program.
With farbfeld, we would only have to worry about it in png2ff and ff2png,
especially in regard to handling 64-Bit PNGs and other gems.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Tue Nov 17 2015 - 18:11:47 CET