Subject: Re: big honkin' images
From: Paul Rohr (paul@abisource.com)
Date: Thu Apr 26 2001 - 07:52:19 CDT
At 12:59 AM 4/21/01 +0200, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
>On vendredi, avril 20, 2001, at 08:19 , Sam TH wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 11:10:53AM -0700, Paul Rohr wrote:
>>> PS: This is a discussion about image scaling, and not JPEGs, right?
>>
>> No, this is actually a jpeg discussion. I said we don't need to worry
>> about jpeg compression, cause those images are useless for wp
>> documents. Then I was proved horribly, horribly wrong. :-)
>
>So your are telling us that we reach a consensus about JPEG too ?
>Good news. :-)
Well, at least some consensus on the following two points:
1. People can and will insert huge images in various formats without
scaling them properly.
2. Some (but by no means all) of those images start out as JPEGs.
However, AFAICT, we haven't yet reached consensus about what to do about the
situation.
What Bill and I were discussing were ways to encourage people to get their
images scaled to an appropriate size, but I don't think we've come up with
anything there yet.
In any event, I guess I'm still tempted to let people insert big honkin'
images (BHIs) if they really want to. However, I see no particular reason
to prevent them from paying a scaling price if they do so. For example, the
following FAQ seems to be entirely appropriate:
Q: I just inserted a BHI into my document, and now the resulting .abw
file is huge. How do I make my document smaller?
A1: Make the image smaller before you insert it.
A2. Compress the document when you save it (ie, as .zabw).
On that theory, adding native JPEG support to the file format is less
necessary, but I'm not sure whether I've convinced anyone of that argument
yet.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Apr 26 2001 - 07:44:46 CDT