xpm vs. png

[John Ellis <johne bellatlantic net>]

I notice many people are still using the xpm format for their
graphics when they install image files. Since we have Imlib,
why can't we try to use a format such as png, it saves a lot of
space, for instance the mailcheck applet installs these files
into /share/pixmaps/mailcheck:

-rw-r--r--   1 root     root        56776 Sep 12 13:45 email-e.xpm
-rw-r--r--   1 root     root       105764 Sep 12 13:45 email.xpm
-rw-r--r--   1 root     root        57913 Sep 12 13:45 tux-anim.xpm

after compressing them to png the sizes are much smaller:

-rw-r--r--   1 root     root         4949 Sep 16 00:25 email-e.png
-rw-r--r--   1 root     root         9966 Sep 16 00:25 email.png
-rw-r--r--   1 root     root         4499 Sep 16 00:25 tux-anim.png

thats from 220453 down to 19414 bytes, a savings of 91% !

I know xpm must be used when including in source, but it would be
nice to save some space when xpm is not really needed. Do we
have (or need) an 'official' policy towards this?

John
--
John Ellis <johne@bellatlantic.net>
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Haven/5235/