Re: ... aPNG (Animated PNG)

Kato-N wrote:
> 
> Ralph Giles 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?
> 
> To tell the truth, I was in sympathy with the proposal of adding animation
> features to PNG in the beginning.  But the more the discussion continues, the
> more I fear that APNG with the same signature as PNG has destroyes completely
> the design philosophy of PNG and MNG.
> 
> Is it possible to port the VLC+alpha (or LC-alpha) features of libmng into
> libpng?  If yes, it seems to me the best solution now.

I've done VLC and LC+move,clip,loop, with JNG, in ImageMagick using
libpng.
It's not a little 5k piece of code though. More like 200k.  Oh, it's
read-write, not just read like browsers need.

Glenn

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