Talk:OggMNG: Difference between revisions

From XiphWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (added to dicussion)
m (Put back attribution)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
On January 29, 2008, under ''Implementation Notes'', Xpete wrote:  
On January 29, 2008, under ''Implementation Notes'', [[UserXpete:Xpete]] wrote:  
:Because of OggSpots, an extra presentational format for presentation slide-like stuff isn't needed
:Because of OggSpots, an extra presentational format for presentation slide-like stuff isn't needed
:In a presentation, you can also just pause the video for showing things.
:In a presentation, you can also just pause the presentation, video for showing things.


On August 9, 2005, under ''Further Speculation'', Sayoshant wrote:
On August 9, 2005, under ''Further Speculation'', Sayoshant wrote:

Latest revision as of 06:04, 24 August 2009

On January 29, 2008, under Implementation Notes, UserXpete:Xpete wrote:

Because of OggSpots, an extra presentational format for presentation slide-like stuff isn't needed
In a presentation, you can also just pause the presentation, video for showing things.

On August 9, 2005, under Further Speculation, Sayoshant wrote:

Some people, including staff members of Mozilla, believe MNG should be replaced by APNG, a superset extension of PNG with multi-image support, but that should still be backwards-compatibility.
I, non-Xiph member, wonder on other hand if OggMNG should become OggAPNG or actually keep the project as MNG.
Keep it as mng because apng and mng are NOT THE SAME things:
mng >>>http://www.libpng.org/pub/mng/
apng >>>http://animatedpng.com/