Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "apng".
Did you mean:
ang
2008 Apr 11
1
Ogg/Spots and Ogg/MNG
Hi, please ignore this message if this is a stupid question:
Would supporting APNG instead be any easier?
Cheers,
KJ
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Ian Malone <ibmalone at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/04/2008, ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com <ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > Ogg/Spots has no implementation since we agreed that Ogg/MNG would
>...
2008 Apr 11
4
Ogg/Spots and Ogg/MNG
> Ogg/Spots has no implementation since we agreed that Ogg/MNG would
> fully cover all the functionality of Ogg/Spots. However, Ogg/MNG has
> not progressed as much as we would all have liked.
>
> So, if you would like to get images into Ogg, I'd recommend
> improving/implementing Ogg/MNG support. :-)
I'd looked at MNG (which I didn't know about at the time) and to
2008 Apr 11
1
Ogg/Spots and Ogg/MNG
...eless" is the obvious idea that comes to mind. Hmm, a bit too
hardcoded though. Maybe setting granulerate to zero. Hmm, no, that'd
cause a lot of divides by zero would it.
MNG does look complex though. I also had a look at SVG, but it does
scripting, etc, which isn't something I want. APNG looks simpler and
closer to what I'd want, but I've seen comments saying it doesn't play
so nice with being a PNG extension. Still looking on and off.
Anyway, I'm thinking aloud again. Aloud not being the right word in this
particular case though.