Re: xpm vs. png

[John Ellis <johne bellatlantic net>]

George <jirka@5z.com> wrote:

On Wed, Sep 16, 1998 at 12:48:05PM -0500, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
>> > 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?
>> 
>> We should be switching to a better format.  I am all for changing the
>> files to png.  Can you do this?
>
>including rgb data directly is better then xpm's ... like the gnome stock
>icons ... the only reason to use xpm's is that it's easier
>
>what's files should be kept in .png's

Any image file that gets installed, most images that install in
..../share/pixmaps, for instance. The point is to get away from XPM and move
to a more efficient (compressed) format.

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