> I'm all for picking one format to provide the most common sizes > (.jpg or .png) plus a single .fig, .ps and .xcf version. > > The big question is whether we should use .jpg or .png for the > supplied versions. I vote for .png. I don't. I suggest .jpg for the same reasons you don't think we should use .png for our images... when .png is supported enough, we can switch. That way, we encourage the use of atleast something free and useable. If they really want a gif (for transparency, for example) or a png, they can convert it them selves from the the .fig, .ps or .xcf.
> I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but I still believe we should > use .gif for the images on our site until .png is supported by > a large enough percentage of browsers in use. This wouldn't > be a problem except there are a lot of people using old versions > of browsers. Why not .jpg? We're using it for the logo, atleast, because transparency isn't an issue.. the background of both logo and web page are white. -- Please cc all mailing list replies to me, also. ========================================================================= * http://benham.net/index.html <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <>< * * -------------------- * -----------------------------------------------* * Debian Developer, Debian Project Secretary, Debian Webmaster * * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * =========================================================================
pgpmoRNPbm0OH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
