Reply inline: - Dave
Richard Dobson wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 10:46 PM > Subject: Re: [JDEV] Emoticons: guidelines > > > > also those sort of devices can currently display .png or > > > .gif, only .wbmp, should these be not allowed to use emoticons? No > everyone > > > should be able to. > > I'm sorry, but I don't speak English too well. Maybe you can clarify > that? > > Just bear in mind that if you're trying to tell me that the Portable > > Network Graphic format isn't standard enough (but the proprietary GIF > > format (or worse, the Windows BitMaP format) is, presumably), I won't > > hear of it: Jabber is an open standard, and including proprietary image > > formats in it is bordering on heresy. > > Since when has .wbmp meant an image is a windows bitmap, it stands for > Wireless Bitmap the only image format supported on WAP phones, which is > currently is the only real thing that has GPRS capability, so I dont know > where you got Windows Bitmap from, also .wbmp is not a proprietary format by Nope, I wasn't referring to .wbmp files; I was simply going through the most annoying proprietary image formats I could think of off-hand. Seeing .wbmp in your message probably reminded me of .bmp, though ... and .gif, well, I've been on a crusade against them for a while already ;-) > any means it is part of the wap standards, I said all of this because your I happen to hate the WAP standards, but that's neither here nor there; they _are_ pretty much standardized, and there's not much I can do about it at this point: just being sour about it is silly. However, I would insist that any device that supports images be able to read PNG format files, because standards are good, and should therefore be supported. > method assumes that the receiving client (in this case a WAP phone) > definately supports the image format you are sending it, and if you are > sending .png, .gif, or .jpg a WAP phone would be unable to support it, this > is YAP (yet another problem) with your system. Obviously, there's a cruel little HTTP-based solution you can use if you're fundamentally opposed to standard image formats, involving client capability negotiation (totally compatible with HTTP/1.0 and 1.1). Briefly, here's how it works: when your client sends a request to an HTTP server, it normally sends an HTTP-Accept header, listing all the MIME types that your client understands. There's nothing stopping the server from sending a version of the image that's in - or even converting an image on-the-fly from whatever format it's stored in into - some format that the client supports. Most popular web servers support client capability negotiation. (A variation on the same is often used to decide what language to send a document in, BTW.) > > > _______________________________________________ > jdev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev > _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
