You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Matteo Di Giovinazzo <ma...@infinito.it> on 2002/03/17 15:12:57 UTC
GIFTranscoder w/o LZW licensing issues
Hello all!
I've found a GIFOutputStream (that can turned into a GIFTranscoder) that
does *not* implement the LZW compression.
www.shetline.com
>From the license:
| Copyright (c) 2000, 2001 by Kerry Shetline, kerry@shetline.com.
|
| Note: This code does *NOT* implement LZW compression. While the output
| of the compression routine is compatible with LZW, only a simple run-
| length compression is performed. The degree of compression as compared
| to LZW is not as high, but execution time is faster, and LZW licensing
| issues are avoided. Depending on image size and image complexity, the
| differences in compression may or may not have practical significance
| for particular applications.
I've sent a mail to Kerry Shetline for asking him a donation to Apache
Foundation of his code.
Any update will be sent to this mailing list!
Ciao,
Matteo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: GIFTranscoder w/o LZW licensing issues
Posted by Matteo Di Giovinazzo <ma...@infinito.it>.
All the community hope in the affirmation of the W3C standard PNG in the
web,
but GIF is so common and it hasn't transparency problems like PNG
when it's view in MSIE.
Moreover you're sure that the image is viewable on a large set of browsers,
like old mozilla/3.x compatibles, and on many WAP devices that support GIF.
This implementation can compress the GIF with run length encoding
algorithm, less efficiently than LZW algorithm of course, but more than
an uncompressed image!
ciao,
matteo
Chris wrote:
> On Sunday, 17 March, 2002, 15:12:57, Matteo wrote:
>
> MDG> Hello all!
>
> MDG> I've found a GIFOutputStream (that can turned into a GIFTranscoder)
that
> MDG> does *not* implement the LZW compression.
>
> Sure, anyone can implement GIF *encoding* as long as they are content
> to produce huge, uncompressed images.
>
> Its not clear why that is a benefit compared to just producing a PNG,
> though.
>
> --
> Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: GIFTranscoder w/o LZW licensing issues
Posted by Chris Lilley <ch...@w3.org>.
On Sunday, 17 March, 2002, 15:12:57, Matteo wrote:
MDG> Hello all!
MDG> I've found a GIFOutputStream (that can turned into a GIFTranscoder) that
MDG> does *not* implement the LZW compression.
Sure, anyone can implement GIF *encoding* as long as they are content
to produce huge, uncompressed images.
Its not clear why that is a benefit compared to just producing a PNG,
though.
--
Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-users-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-users-help@xml.apache.org
Re: GIFTranscoder w/o LZW licensing issues
Posted by Chris Lilley <ch...@w3.org>.
On Sunday, 17 March, 2002, 15:12:57, Matteo wrote:
MDG> Hello all!
MDG> I've found a GIFOutputStream (that can turned into a GIFTranscoder) that
MDG> does *not* implement the LZW compression.
Sure, anyone can implement GIF *encoding* as long as they are content
to produce huge, uncompressed images.
Its not clear why that is a benefit compared to just producing a PNG,
though.
--
Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: GIFTranscoder w/o LZW licensing issues
Posted by Chris Lilley <ch...@w3.org>.
On Sunday, 17 March, 2002, 15:12:57, Matteo wrote:
MDG> Hello all!
MDG> I've found a GIFOutputStream (that can turned into a GIFTranscoder) that
MDG> does *not* implement the LZW compression.
Sure, anyone can implement GIF *encoding* as long as they are content
to produce huge, uncompressed images.
Its not clear why that is a benefit compared to just producing a PNG,
though.
--
Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please check that your question has not already been answered in the
FAQ before posting. <http://xml.apache.org/cocoon/faqs.html>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <co...@xml.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <co...@xml.apache.org>
Re: GIFTranscoder w/o LZW licensing issues
Posted by Michael Hartle <mh...@hartle-klug.com>.
Matteo Di Giovinazzo wrote:
>Hello all!
>
>I've found a GIFOutputStream (that can turned into a GIFTranscoder) that
>does *not* implement the LZW compression.
>
>www.shetline.com
>
This sounds very interesting; you should directly get in touch with the
batik-dev's, as Transcoders are their domain.
Best regards,
Michael Hartle,
Hartle & Klug GbR
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org