Subject: Re: XP design for image support
From: Sam TH (sam@uchicago.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 20 2001 - 13:18:00 CDT
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:15:27PM +0100, Rui M Silva wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 12:56:37PM -0500, Sam TH wrote:
> > > Just yesterday, a business colleague sent me a 4 MB RTF file that
> > > contained only a screen shot of a dialog box. I guess they did it
> > > that way because that was the shape of nail their hammer fit.
> > > The moral is that users don't always do smart stuff. Anybody who
> > > communicates regularly with MSOffice users probably knows this in
> > > spades.
> > Ok, ok, I give. Users do really dumb stuff. We do need to worry
> > about that case. Is jpeg the best decision for that case?
> > Convince me.
>
> Stupid, heh? Now imagine the image was in a zipped directory, with
> the file in it and the .abw as well.
>
> You could remove the image, and zip it again. Abi would complain of
> the inexistance of the image, but the document wouldn't be crippled
> (in size) anymore, now would it?
>
> That's why we *can't* do inline images. Some people do dumb
> stuff. Not all, thei are a minority, but the main problem lies in
> that the stupid always show up in a crow of a million intelligent
> creatures.
>
I fail to see what the benifit is here. If you want the doc w/o the
image, open it, and remove the image.
sam th --- sam@uchicago.edu --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key
DeCSS: http://samth.dyndns.org/decss
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Fri Apr 20 2001 - 13:05:50 CDT