On Sat, 2006-05-27 at 08:08 +0100, Alan Horkan wrote:
> On Fri, 26 May 2006, Nathan Summers wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 18:52:44 -0400
> > From: Nathan Summers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: Not Photoshop <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] New microsoft image format
> > On 5/26/06, Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If you hit the "Do not agree" option it will still let you read the
> > > specifications without agreeing. I expect they'll change that soon
> > > though.
> > Is there anything interesting in there?
> In my opinion no, not really but you might find it more interesting. The
> ideas all seem to be more or less covered by other existing standards like
> JPEG 2000 primarily and various others.
> (Frankly I'm more interested in XPS/Metro which attempts to replace PDF,
> and XAML/WVG/Avalon/whatever-they're-calling-it-this-week attempt to
> replace SVG.)
Really? I'm not interested at all. Zero percent.
To me that looks like the usual M$ attempts to "replace"
just about anything that other people have done.
It's already ambivalent to have GIMP running on windows
at all, I'm not interested in taking this any further
by supporting these formats, and thereby supporting M$.
The free software community doesn't get any support from
just my 2 cent,
Gimp-developer mailing list