Re: Any reason not to use PNG images in packaged HTML manuals?
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 09:47:39AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> We got rid of compressed GIFs upstream in the gri manual (see
> package gri-html-doc) and mostly used jpg format instead to show
> graph examples. The png format would look a lot nicer (jpg
> fuzzes out the edges and looks bad), but we are concerned that
> perhaps some browsers can't handle them.
All recent browsers (I'm talking about Netscape 4.5+, Internet
Explorer 4+, Opera 2+, Mozilla) support PNGs to some extend. Netscape
doesn't support transparency as far as I can tell, but otherwise is
fine; IE supports almost all of PNG's features, with a few bugs in
its code; I'm not sure about the extent of Opera's support; Mozilla
supports PNG fully (to the best of my knowledge).
> For exmaple, even the Debian web site is still using Gifs instead
> of PNG format.
Someone should possibly convert them where appropriate. I'll do it if
no-one else wants to.
> Should we not use png yet?
No, definitely use it, except where transparency is strongly required.
All the above is IMO; IANAIE (image expert).
Alisdair McDiarmid email@example.com
[http://wasters.org/pubkey.asc perl -i.mac -p -e 's/\r/\n/smg;']