Steve wrote:
>Obviously, if the purpose of a page is to show photos,
>then you need a graphical browser.
I agree (who doesn't?), it's for many other uses it's bad to have images.
> Then you have to decide proprietary/licensed graphics format
>vs. free/open graphics format. I choose open. True, at this
>moment in time, more browsers support the proprietary gif formats
>than support png, but png is philosophically more acceptable to
>me because anyone at all may create a png graphic, while gifs are
>only legally able to be created by license.
I don't need a license to make a GIF image (and this is as I see it one of
the biggest misstakes the "PNG community" are making - you are not, as I
see in a later post). The person(s)/company that made the program must have
one. I do agree with you that it "feels" better to use it, but one should
be aware of the problems with PNG when using it (not all are). In the end
you choose yourself what you want to use. An interesting thing I've noted
is that in general PNG is mostly used by people interested in the GNU concept.
//Bernie
