On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 16:52 -0400, Jason Pruim wrote: > On Oct 1, 2008, at 4:36 PM, Daniel Brown wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 4:33 PM, tedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> The term "web-safe" when applied to images was a misnomer -- there > >> was no > >> such thing. > >> > >> It originally pertained to certain colors that were consider > >> staples of > >> browsers, such as red, white, blue, cornflowerblue, and so. I think > >> there > >> was 256 of them -- but I may be wrong. > > > > What's wrong with everyone? No one has yet thrown out a Wikipedia > > link. I know damn well that some of you looked it up! > > We are waiting for you to get off your lazy ass and do some work for > us! :P > > When I said web-safe images, I didn't mean images that were in web-safe colours. You all know that browsers can only be relied upon to display jpeg, gif and png images. Well, jpeg has 2 formats, one that browsers can display (web-safe) and one that browsers can't (jpeg 2000 not web-safe).
I hope this clears things up? Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
