but something is really a pain if you add a doctype for html 4.01 it does
not work anymore, only the one for 3.2 works
and then of course as ID and STYLE for DIV did not exist in version 3.2 the
page is not anymore W3C compliant
Philippe
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd";>
At 15:1
On Monday 23 December 2002 02:37 pm, Philippe Rousselot wrote:
> sorry
>
> I forgot it would be sent as html page
>
> go to
>
> www.utpala.net/test.html
>
>
> Philippe
===
Konqueror, Konqueror with Mozilla bindings and Mozilla 1.2 all view the
page the same for me. Everything
On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:37:04 +0100
Philippe Rousselot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sorry
>
> I forgot it would be sent as html page
>
> go to
>
> www.utpala.net/test.html
>
>
> Philippe
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Gimp-user mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!
___
Gimp-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
On 2002-12-22 at 1342.00 -0800, zeus typed this:
> OK...what's make gimp 1.3 worth to use? Should i wait until stable version.
>
> Is the ne GIMP support CMYK color mode? Because i need CMYK for printing.
>
> Is there any page where i can view new things with GIMP 1.3??
>
truthfully, gimp-1.3 an
sorry
I forgot it would be sent as html page
go to
www.utpala.net/test.html
Philippe
At 20:08 23/12/02 +0100, you wrote:
At 12:40 23/12/02 -0500, you wrote:
On 2002-12-23 many people:
>
>
Talked about png images and web browser compatibility
please try this on your browsers
the first i
At 12:40 23/12/02 -0500, you wrote:
On 2002-12-23 many people:
>
>
Talked about png images and web browser compatibility
please try this on your browsers
the first image is a png and is visible with IE 6.0.2800 at least including
the alpha transparency. I do not know about the
On 2002-12-22 at 1320.57 +0100, Niklas typed this:
>
> For the CMYK thingys you are asking for, work is being done from what I
> know and this might be in the 1.2.4 when it comes out as stable.
>
well, there is a typo here, i think. but even fixing the typo the
information is not so acurate.
cmy
On 2002-12-23 at 0135.58 -0800, Joshua Thorin Messer typed this:
>
> Oh, wait when you wrote "Currently browsers do not support PNG
> widely enough to use PNG instead" you might have meant "Currently
> Internet Explorer on Windows..." in which you are correct. But guess
> what? If the net is full
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 11:35:38AM -0500, PL O'Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually PNG does do animations and they are called MNG.
Actually PNG does NOT do animations, and it's not called MNG ;)
Both tiff and jpeg can store jpeg-like and losless images, they are still
different. MNG and P
On Monday 23 December 2002 04:56 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann
) wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 01:35:58AM -0800, Joshua Thorin Messer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Oh, wait when you wrote "Currently browsers do not support PNG
> > widely enough to use PNG instead" you might have
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 11:23:38PM +1300, Thomi Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > The striking majority of browsers, not only IE on Windows. And PNG
> > can't do animations, which are very important. So GIF will need to
> > stay around for some time :(
>
> which ones exactly? as stated befo
On Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:24:44 -0500
Clayton Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm sure this has been asked a lot, but is there any way to get gif
> support for the Gimp? I currently do a lot of web development, and hope
> to switch to all-linux. My main issue right now is of course, no gif
> sup
Thus spake Thomi Richards ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > The striking majority of browsers, not only IE on Windows. And PNG
> > can't do animations, which are very important. So GIF will need to
> > stay around for some time :(
>
> which ones exactly? as stated before, mozilla, netscape (the later
>
Thus spake Marc A. Lehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> The striking majority of browsers, not only IE on Windows. And PNG can't
> do animations, which are very important. So GIF will need to stay around
> for some time :(
>
Please follow my lead and list some specific browsers that do not
support png
Le lun 23/12/2002 à 10:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
> The striking majority of browsers, not only IE on Windows. And PNG can't
> do animations, which are very important. So GIF will need to stay around
> for some time :(
Well IE supports png not too badly, except for the alpha transparency in
2
> The striking majority of browsers, not only IE on Windows. And PNG
> can't do animations, which are very important. So GIF will need to
> stay around for some time :(
which ones exactly? as stated before, mozilla, netscape (the later
versions), konqueror, even dillo works with png's.
--
This i
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 01:35:58AM -0800, Joshua Thorin Messer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh, wait when you wrote "Currently browsers do not support PNG
> widely enough to use PNG instead" you might have meant "Currently
The striking majority of browsers, not only IE on Windows. And PNG can't
d
Thus spake Clayton Coleman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> I'm sure this has been asked a lot, but is there any way to get gif support
> for the Gimp? I currently do a lot of web development, and hope to switch
> to all-linux. My main issue right now is of course, no gif support.
> Currently browsers
19 matches
Mail list logo
