Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

At Last, PNG An ISO Standard Under Publication

Posted by timothy on from the vectors-n-stuff dept.

Jeex writes "After its first draft back in '95, the Portable Network Graphics (PNG) format is finally, as of 2003-04-25, an ISO standard under publication. Links: ISO technical programme: JTC 1/SC 24, PNG Homepage."

43 comments

  1. So, does that mean... by FroMan · · Score: 4, Funny

    MS will still not have proper PNG transparency in IE?

    Just now its ISO official?

    --
    Norris/Palin 2012
    Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
  2. Cheesy Website by BlakeGarretson · · Score: 4, Funny

    The reason that it wasn't standardized before this is because nobody could take it serious with that cheesy website. ISO apparently thought PNG was made up by some teenager in his parents' basement.

  3. Noobs by Profane+Motherfucker · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    After leading the cry against the evils of patents and the overzealous attacks on end users by corporate lawyers, It's nice to see that Slashdot still uses GIFs.

    Fools.

    1. Re:Noobs by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      CmdrTaco downloaded the gif-to-png commandline converter. However, it requires correct spelling to work properly.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    2. Re:Noobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not bad... not bad at all.

  4. And guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, that's right, 8 years later, Internet Explorer still doesn't support PNG properly!

    1. Re:And guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and to follow on, they were talking about implementing it for IE4!

      On the other hand, our buds at Microsoft recognized the benefits of PNG and apparently embraced it wholeheartedly. They have not only made it the native image format of the Office97 application suite but have also repeatedly promised to put it into Internet Explorer (theoretically by the time of the 4.0 betas--we'll see about that). Assuming they do, Netscape is almost certain to follow suit. (See? Microsoft is good for something!) At that point PNG should enjoy a real burst of WWW interest and usage.
  5. GIF and JPEG . . . by Dausha · · Score: 1

    I suppose this makes it easier for ISO to destandardize JPEG like was rumored previously. My question is, how long from PNG's ISO standardization and full acceptance by the community of browsers (e.g. Mozilla, Opera, IE, etc.) I live in the Unix environment, so I'm not aware of IE has given full transparency to transparent PNGs yet--that's why I'm asking.

    --
    What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
    1. Re:GIF and JPEG . . . by bofkentucky · · Score: 1

      Ummm, jpeg is lossy compression, gif and png are lossless. Jpeg is good for photo's, png for logos, line art, and other high detail work.

      --
      09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
    2. Re:GIF and JPEG . . . by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Gif and png are NOT lossless.
      They CAN be, in certain situations depending on the source and the options used, but they are deffinately not lossless by deffinition.

      --
      No Comment.
    3. Re:GIF and JPEG . . . by fredrikj · · Score: 2, Informative

      PNG is lossless by definition. (GIF is also lossless, although only when the source image has 256 or less colors.)

      The definition of lossless is that if you take an uncompressed bitmap, compress it with the compression method, and then decompress it, you'll get a file that is identical to the source bitmap, bit by bit. PNG is based on a general-purpose compression method, IIRC the same one that's used in .zip files, so you can (!) use PNG to compress executable files or audio files or whatever, if you just feed them into the encoder as raw images. PNG packs by patterns in the byte structure, and no data is lost.

      This is not the case for JPEG. JPEG doesn't compress by the data bits, but reformats the image as an approximation of the source image, based on the redundancy of color values as they appear in the rendered image. A JPEG image cannot be decompressed to an image identical to the source it was generated from. Therefore, JPEG is lossy.

    4. Re:GIF and JPEG . . . by leviramsey · · Score: 1

      Uh...

      LZW is a lossless algorithm, and it's the only algorithm supported by GIF, so how could GIF be lossy?

    5. Re:GIF and JPEG . . . by Webmonger · · Score: 3, Informative

      GIF and PNG use lossless compression techniques. They are lossless. If you have a black-and-white image and you save it into GIF or PNG, you will get an identical image back when you load it.

      You're confusing format with interface (because you refer to options used, and those are an interface thing). GIF is lossless, but it can only represent images with 256 colours or less. (Black-and-white images meet that test.) It's impossible to save an image with more than 256 colours as a GIF, so many programs will convert it for you. That doesn't mean GIF is lossy. Just means that it has limitations. Save any 256-colour image, load it up, and you'll get exactly what you had before.

    6. Re:GIF and JPEG . . . by mraymer · · Score: 1
      so you can (!) use PNG to compress executable files or audio files or whatever, if you just feed them into the encoder as raw images.

      That sounds really fun, but I can't fool any of my image programs into thinking, say, an EXE is a BMP by simply renaming them. Is there something special I need to do to get the program to believe the file is really a BMP? If that's not the case, do you know of any Windows software that this trick will work in?

      Thanks.

      --

      "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking

  6. Great! by larry+bagina · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    But when will the hypocritical fucks on slashdot start using png graphics instead of gif?

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    1. Re:Great! by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
      When will dumbasses like you grow up?

      I would imagine Slashdot will switch to PNG sometime after IE has proper support for it.

      --
      Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
    2. Re:Great! by larry+bagina · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      IE has proper support for 8-bit png. It's only transparent and maybe some 32-bit png that it doesn't support.

      PS - do you prefer sucking Hemos's dick or CmdrTaco's dick?

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    3. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet you also imagine having sex. With a partner.

    4. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IE supports png better than linux supports IE.

    5. Re:Great! by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
      PS - do you prefer sucking Hemos's dick or CmdrTaco's dick?

      I prefer having sex with my wife. Please grow up.

      --
      Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
    6. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not true at all. You can run IE under Wine or VMWare. IE, on the other hand, cannot render PNGs properly. It also can't handle many standard features of HTML proeprly, such as the object element. It also cannot handle HTTP properly - doing what is explicitly forbidden by the specification and guessing at mime-types. What else? Oh yes, it has hideous CSS bugs, and has 13 upatched security holes.

      Fact: IE on Windows is a piece of shit.

    7. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT. HAND.

    8. Re:Great! by seinman · · Score: 3, Insightful
      But when will the hypocritical fucks on slashdot start using png graphics instead of gif?

      Probably about the same time that the hypocritical fucks who complain about PNG not working in IE shut up and switch to a better browser instead of just complaining about the one they have.
    9. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how the fuck can web developers, the people who complain about PNG support in IE get everybody else to switch browser, brainiac?

    10. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Interestingly, people actually gloat about this.

      Ha! I wasn't really trying to have a rational conversation, I just don't have anything better to do. So there!

      Why gloat about your lack of anything better to do than try and look stupid?

    11. Re:Great! by seinman · · Score: 1

      I'm not talking about web developers. Everyone I know (besides myself, naturally) uses IE, and everyone I know complains about it. Yet when I tell them about all the other browsers that they can try, they just stick with IE, and keep complaining. If the majority of the web users keep this attitude, those web designers are going to be stuck with GIF for a lot longer than they should be. Sure, good PNG support in IE would be a good thing, but in the meantime the end users are going to have to do something to make it happen.

    12. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not talking about web developers. Everyone I know (besides myself, naturally) uses IE, and everyone I know complains about it.

      Maybe, but I bet they aren't saying things like "oh I wish IE supported PNG!", are they?

    13. Re:Great! by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      The GIF patent expires on June 30, 2003 -- that's only a month away, so get your complaining in ASAP!

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  7. Thank you Microsoft. by fluor2 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    This is why I prefer Microsoft Products . The standards just take TOO LONG to make. 1995? There are just too many people getting involved when standards are made.

    Good luck ISO, International Slow-down-the evolution Organization !

    If we compare with the history of Unix and BSD in general, we would still stick to command-line windows in Xwindows if it had not been for Microsoft Windows. Thank you Microsoft.

    1. Re:Thank you Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why I prefer Microsoft Products . The standards just take TOO LONG to make.

      The PNG specification has been available, virtually unmodified for 8 years. Microsoft attempted to code PNG support into IE4, IE 5, IE5.5, and IE6, but botched it every single time.

      Because of IE's market share, web developers cannot depend upon PNG properly for years to come.

      Thank you, Microsoft indeed.

  8. too little too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Well, i suppose it's good for png to be standardized, but why bother?

    SVG has been standardized, and is a more than suitable replacement for png. As well, the LZW patent expires in 3 months, and png doesn't offer any advantages over gif, and numerous disadvantages (like lack of support for animations).

    1. Re:too little too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SVG has been standardized,

      No it hasn't. SVG is a W3C Recommendation. The W3C is not a standards body, nor do they try to be. Taking PNG as an example, PNG reached Recommendation status years ago, and has only just been ratified as a standard. Yes, this means that HTML 3.2, HTML 4.01, XHTML 1.0 and XHTML 1.1 are not standards either. You can use ISO-HTML though, which is based upon HTML 4, and has been ratified as a standard.

      and is a more than suitable replacement for png.

      SVG is a vector image format, not a raster image format. As such, it is unsuitable for replacing PNG. In fact, when an SVG image needs to contain a raster image, PNG is usually chosen to represent that portion of the image.

      png doesn't offer any advantages over gif

      Yes it does. 8-bit alpha transparency. Truecolor images. Better compression in most cases.

      numerous disadvantages (like lack of support for animations).

      So numerous you can only think of one, a flimsy one at best as MNG is "PNG+animation", in the same way GIF89a is "GIF87+animation".

      Oh, sorry, I didn't realise - you are a childlike person who jerks off to the thought of actually interacting with a real live person, right? And I suppose you are going to feel proud of getting a response, too?

  9. interestingly... by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
    ... you are wrong. It is perfectly possible to run IE on Linux nearly flawlessly using the proper version of wine, I have even done this myself once upon a time.

    So, I must say that Linux support IE better than IE supports PNG :)

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  10. Stealth Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once they accept it as a standard, we can find out how many people claim to have patents.

  11. Oh, joy by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    We have a perfectly fine standard for years...but now we get to *pay* for the privilege of getting ahold of the standard. Sigh.

    --
    May we never see th
  12. Finally, a change by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 1

    I'm so glad the "do you pronounce GIF as giff or jiff" debate will soon be replaced by the "do you pronounce PNG as ping or p-n-g" debate. On another topic, I always enjoy the "how do you pronounce Linux, Lie-nux because Linus is not pronounced Linnus or as Linnux" argument, though that has mostly gone away now.

    1. Re:Finally, a change by Webmonger · · Score: 1

      If you're from Finland, you do pronounce it "Linnus".

  13. IE cannot read MNG by yerricde · · Score: 2, Informative

    a flimsy one at best as MNG is "PNG+animation", in the same way GIF89a is "GIF87+animation".

    There's a big difference: Out of the box, the most recent released version of Microsoft Internet Explorer can display GIF89a animations. Out of the box, the most recent released version of Microsoft Internet Explorer cannot display MNG animations.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:IE cannot read MNG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, and this stops you from using PNG how? Use PNG in place of standard GIF, and continue using GIF animination until MNG reaches the right market saturation point.

    2. Re:IE cannot read MNG by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      I'm just waiting until The GIMP supports MNG creation/editing. :)

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  14. PNG is pronounced "ping" by yerricde · · Score: 1

    PNG is pronounced like the duck.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  15. The Cher Patent Act? by yerricde · · Score: 1

    The GIF patent expires on June 30, 2003

    Not if Unisys bands together with Fraunhofer, Charlie Northrup, and big pharmaceutical manufacturers and demands that the U.S. Congress enact a Cher Patent Term Harmonization Act.

    that's only a month away

    Try two months, which is more than enough for intense lobbying. How long did it take to get USAPATRIOT passed?

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  16. Unfortunately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    looking at the practically unused JPEG2000 format (ISO/IEC 15444-1) this is unlikely to bring PNG any more support then it already has.