On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 13:05:39 +0700 Constantin Kaplinsky <co...@tightvnc.com> wrote:
> Hello Adam, > > >>>>> Adam Tkac wrote: > > > AFAIK the Tight encoding is a mechanism to encapsulate other > > encodings thus you end with something like a "protocol inside > > protocol" (The Tight encoding already has many sub-encodings like > > FTP-like transfer related encodings and the JPEG encoding as you wrote > > above). I really don't like such approach because it might end with > > crippled and badly designed protocol. > > You are seriously mistaken. Tight encoding is just an encoding, not a > "protocol inside protocol". It does not allow to encapsulate other > encodings. Indeed, Tight encoding has subencodings (e.g. JPEG) but the > set of subencodings is fixed and they are integral parts of the Tight > encoding and just allow to encode data in different ways depending on > the statistical properties of that data. > I think Adam's point is precisely that Tight has sub-encodings. The server could just as well have chosen between several "normal" encodings based on the data. Subencodings are not needed for that. In essence Tight layers another encoding system on top of the existing one. (And they're not really fixed either as the JPEG encoding is not used until the server has seen a "Quality" encoding.) Rgds -- Pierre Ossman OpenSource-based Thin Client Technology System Developer Telephone: +46-13-21 46 00 Cendio AB Web: http://www.cendio.com
_______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list VNC-List@realvnc.com To remove yourself from the list visit: http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
