Re: [Evolution] pjpeg revisited




It comes up a fair amount in a google search.  It's apparently a
progressive jpeg.  Perhaps the distinction exists because some software
groks jpeg but not progressive jpeg.  The difference is a nonissue to
linux users, because the jpeg library we use understands both.

Why do I think microsoft has something to do with this?  :)

On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 12:51, Not Zed wrote:
Bloody dickheads.  That's all i've got to say to that.  It isn't any
standard type, and is infact, merely jpeg as far as I can tell.

FWIW 1.6 will treat them as images like anything else.

On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 10:39, Ted Anderson wrote: 
Just so the people using the GMX mail service don't feel alone,
apparently Yahoo is converting images to pjpeg as well. I just received
some Yahoo mails with attachments, and all of the photos were pjpeg. I
guess the supporters of this type of image need to get it added to the
approved list.
-- 
Dan Stromberg DCS/NACS/UCI <strombrg dcs nac uci edu>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]