It comes up a fair amount in a google search. It's apparently a progressive jpeg. Perhaps the distinction exists because some software groks jpeg but not progressive jpeg. The difference is a nonissue to linux users, because the jpeg library we use understands both.
Why do I think microsoft has something to do with this? :) On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 12:51, Not Zed wrote: > Bloody dickheads. That's all i've got to say to that. It isn't any > standard type, and is infact, merely jpeg as far as I can tell. > > FWIW 1.6 will treat them as images like anything else. > > On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 10:39, Ted Anderson wrote: > > Just so the people using the GMX mail service don't feel alone, > > apparently Yahoo is converting images to pjpeg as well. I just received > > some Yahoo mails with attachments, and all of the photos were pjpeg. I > > guess the supporters of this type of image need to get it added to the > > approved list. -- Dan Stromberg DCS/NACS/UCI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
