Re: cOMp chunk [was: EXIF support in PNG]
Glenn Randers-Pehrson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.graphics.png.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CA+PdXcvARuQ5EZAi8G0RCm=ReeOsGr5qU4U03s8kbtsYLqW+aQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 2:44 PM, John Bowler < [email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Glenn Randers-Pehrson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Willem, would you allow a compression byte on the eXIf chunk, then? >> > > I'd vote against that, for the same reason that Willem just stated; I > don't think it will ever be usable in practice. Actually I don't think > cOMp or cOMP would be either; I can achieve the same thing with gzip > foo.png, I'm just proposing it to avoid complexity in the eXIF chunk. > I think that a large fraction of the time, the eXIf chunk will be ignored or simply copied. It is no more complex to ignore or copy a compressed chunk than an uncompressed one, but we are talking about a difference of tens of kbytes per image. Glenn ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ png-mng-misc mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/png-mng-misc