[Info-vax] proper format for JPEG files

[Mark Berryman]

On 7/30/11 1:53 AM, Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote:
> In article<j0v3t9$oq1$1 at news.albasani.net>, Jan-Erik Soderholm
> <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com>  writes:
>
>> Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote 2011-07-29 19:44:
>>> In article<j0slml$7ig$1 at news.albasani.net>, Jan-Erik Soderholm
>>> <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com>   writes:
>>>
>>>> As long as the files "works" (that is, are displayed correctly on the
>>>> usual browsers) I couldn't care less how they are stored... :-)
>>>> What is "a variety of software" ?
>>>
>>> Other browsers?  Or can I assume if one browser sees them OK all will?
>>> Perhaps XV or something?
>>
>> Well, the usual browsers on popular desktop systems... :-)
>> IE, FF, Opera, and so on.
>
> Right.  I don't want to settle on a format which works for what I have
> tested only to find that it doesn't work with some other browser, unless
> that other browser is violating some standard and I am not.

It is the web server running on the host with the file that would care 
about the file format.  As long as the web server can read it, any 
browser will display it (well, any browser capable of displaying a jpeg 
image).

Any program written in C that opens the file in stream format, and any 
VMS utility, will handle the file properly if it is in fix:512 format. 
I would pick that as your standard format unless and until you come 
across something that can't handle it.  Xv will work with that format 
just fine, as will ImageMagick, WASD and Apache (I can't speak for the 
OSU web server).

Mark Berryman

--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to news at netfront.net ---