Re: ... aPNG (Animated PNG)

At 08:01 AM 8/29/2004 -0400, Glenn Randers-Pehrson wrote:
>At 11:44 AM 8/29/2004 +0200, [MSB] wrote:
>>On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 18:13:08 +0200 Alexander Opitz <opitz-MXccdyw32Q/[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Take a look --> 
>>> http://www.pavlov.net/blog/archives/2004/08/apng_coming_soo.html
>>
>>The main argument in favor of this seems to be implementation size (5k vs
>>200k, although the 5k obviously does not include libpng). Does someone
>>have a guesstimate as to how an implementation of MNG-VLC or MNG-LC would
>>compare with that?
>>This whole thing looks like a reinvention of MNG-VLC.
>
>A MNG-VLC implementation using libmng is about 75k.  MNG-LC is about 93k.
>
>By comparison, libmng in mozilla-1.4 is 105k.  I have since cut it down
>to about 45k, to make room for MNG.  That didn't work though; the
>result was they ratcheted down the target size for MNG.
>
>Glenn

I forgot to mention that these figures are for FreeBSD5.0/gcc-3.2.1
Other platforms including Windows will obtain significantly smaller
results.

Glenn


--
Send the message body "help" to [email protected]