I use them and support is basically ubiquitous for non-Windows users. On Windows, the only option that is trusted by default is Mozilla.
I've heard through the grape vine that Windows trust store should eventually trust their root (and by proxy Safari and IE will), but politics are holding it up; no word on Opera.
The first way I can think to remove a digital watermark would be to re-encode the file. Because these formats are lossy, watermarks should be eliminated. Lossy formats are also the reason comparing two originals to find watermarks will not work; that is, unless they are all sourced from the same master with bits replaced, rather than re-encoded on the fly.
I'm surprised at the lack of namespaces. I'd sooner extend xhtml with namepsaces (like XMPP, RSS) than create a bunch of new elements and drop xml semantics. It seems contrary to the mashability that "web2.0" seems to love so much. I guess when used in unison with xmlrpc services and the like it could make the job easier for designers, but in my humble, yet 411-limited, opinion, it seems like the wrong direction to go.
Slashdot Mirror
I use them and support is basically ubiquitous for non-Windows users. On Windows, the only option that is trusted by default is Mozilla. I've heard through the grape vine that Windows trust store should eventually trust their root (and by proxy Safari and IE will), but politics are holding it up; no word on Opera.
One time I worked on a hosting company's support ticket system, and they elevated tickets based on profanity and caps usage.
The first way I can think to remove a digital watermark would be to re-encode the file. Because these formats are lossy, watermarks should be eliminated. Lossy formats are also the reason comparing two originals to find watermarks will not work; that is, unless they are all sourced from the same master with bits replaced, rather than re-encoded on the fly.
I'm surprised at the lack of namespaces. I'd sooner extend xhtml with namepsaces (like XMPP, RSS) than create a bunch of new elements and drop xml semantics. It seems contrary to the mashability that "web2.0" seems to love so much. I guess when used in unison with xmlrpc services and the like it could make the job easier for designers, but in my humble, yet 411-limited, opinion, it seems like the wrong direction to go.