Re: ... aPNG (Animated PNG)

At 08:37 AM 8/29/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 08:01:09AM -0400, Glenn Randers-Pehrson wrote:
>
>> >This whole thing looks like a reinvention of MNG-VLC.
>> 
>> A MNG-VLC implementation using libmng is about 75k.  MNG-LC is about 93k.
>
>I would expect a scratch VLC implementation using just libpng (and 
>probably libjpeg, since that's already in too) would be comparable to
>what apng requires. Any reason that shouldn't be so?
>
>> 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.

Sorry, typo.  libPNG in mozilla-1.4 is 105k and I have since cut it down.

>Ah, so that's what happened. Has anyone worked out what they actually 
>have against MNG?
>
> -r
>
>--
>Send the message body "help" to [email protected]
>


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