Talk:OggMNG: Difference between revisions

From XiphWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(copy APNG comment from the main page)
m (added to dicussion)
Line 1: Line 1:
On January 29, 2008, under ''Implementation Notes'', Xpete wrote:  
On January 29, 2008, under ''Implementation Notes'', Xpete wrote:  
:Because of OggSpots, an extra presentational format for presentation slide-like stuff isn't needed in MNG and I would like that MNG stays MNG and doesn't change to APNG
: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 video for showing things.


Line 7: Line 7:
:
:
:I, non-Xiph member, wonder on other hand if OggMNG should become OggAPNG or actually keep the project as MNG.
: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/

Revision as of 10:18, 14 February 2008

On January 29, 2008, under Implementation Notes, 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 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/