On Saturday 09 May 2009, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2009/05/thoughts_on_fxg.html
On a more technical subject. After reading the spec, it sounds more that FXG
is competing with SVG. On might note, that it would perfectly be possible to
export from Krita/gimp/mypaint
On Wednesday 13 May 2009, Andy Fitzsimon wrote:
> Totally agree.
>
>
> We need to help as much as we can to improve their format out in the
> open.
>
> A good motivation is to get as much public prior art into their spec
> as possible to ensure this thing is free for all to use.
>
> I haven't read
On 05/13/2009 02:01 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
>
>> Reading archived file is not interchange.
>>
>
> Nor is having the file format documentation a solution for long term
> archiving.
The problem is that as soon as you offer the possibil
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
>>
>> Reading archived file is not interchange.
>
> Nor is having the file format documentation a solution for long term
> archiving.
Leonard,
We are talking here about being comp
[Putting back the list in CC as you mistakenly left it out. ]
On 05/13/2009 01:56 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> That is correct. Just as we did with PDF, we are focused on documenting the
> file format (aka SWF) and not the behavior of "conforming readers" (to use
> the ISO PDF terminology). T
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> Reading archived file is not interchange.
>
Nor is having the file format documentation a solution for long term
archiving.
As Project Leader for ISO 19005 (PDF/A), I've spent a LOT of time with
archivists, librarians and the like to un
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> GIMP developers (just like John) have also stated before that they do
> not want PSD
So much for freudian slips :) Of course I was meaning to say meant
XCF. Sorry about that :)
Alexandre
__
On 05/13/2009 12:41 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> If you, they, or anyone else have specific comments, questions, concerns
> about our published specifications for SWF, PLEASE submit them through the
> OpenScreen project! The current docs are our first attempt at trying to
> document "all that i
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> The problem with PSD, at this time, is that it is distributed as part of the
> Photoshop SDK. The SDK includes OTHER material that requires NDA, so folks
> who just want the PSD format docs end up in an unfortunate situation. I
> contin
On 05/13/2009 12:39 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> The problem with PSD, at this time, is that it is distributed as part of the
> Photoshop SDK. The SDK includes OTHER material that requires NDA, so folks
> who just want the PSD format docs end up in an unfortunate situation. I
> continue to work
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine <
alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
>
> > others can read & write our formats. All of our major formats, and most
> of
> > our minor ones, are documented in this fashion - SWF,
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> On 05/13/2009 05:00 AM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
>
>> Our philosophy at Adobe, with respect to file formats and standardization,
>> is that we will publish the details of file format specifications so that
>> others can read& write our f
On 05/13/2009 11:34 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> And while I'm at that, is it legal to use parts of DNG SDK in GPL/LGPL
> software?
Not according to the license. I think I have already requested that, but
got no answer beside a "what for?" in the Adobe forums. The license used
by the XMP_S
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
>
>> others can read & write our formats. All of our major formats, and most of
>> our minor ones, are documented in this fashion - SWF, IDML, Mars/PDFXML,
>> XMP, PSD, etc.
>
>
On 05/13/2009 05:00 AM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> Our philosophy at Adobe, with respect to file formats and standardization,
> is that we will publish the details of file format specifications so that
> others can read& write our formats. All of our major formats, and most of
> our minor ones, a
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> others can read & write our formats. All of our major formats, and most of
> our minor ones, are documented in this fashion - SWF, IDML, Mars/PDFXML,
> XMP, PSD, etc.
Excuse me, are you saying that specification for the current PSD
vers
wow, I'm never typing on my phone again. sorry about that.
And thanks for the clarification Leonard.
So, its a good guess that free software wont have influence in the
making of this format (for the benefit of its own features) But the
good news is its likely that if documented enough, we'll b
On Wednesday 13 May 2009, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> Our philosophy at Adobe, with respect to file formats and standardization,
> is that we will publish the details of file format specifications so that
> others can read & write our formats. All of our major formats, and most of
> our minor ones,
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Andy Fitzsimon wrote:
> Reckon there's a frantion of a chance they make this an open
> unrestricted standard?
>
At some point in the future, if the format has become important enough to
the industry, most certainly.
Our philosophy at Adobe, with respect to file
On 05/12/2009 11:40 PM, Andy Fitzsimon wrote:
> Reckon there's a frantion of a chance they make this an open
> unrestricted standard?
Like Flash? Or like PSD?
Hub
___
CREATE mailing list
CREATE@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailma
To be fair, Adobe aquired both those properties from former
developers. So rhe binar blobs of doom were iherited.
Now they have a chance to do things right
On 13/05/2009, at 11:48 AM, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> On 05/12/2009 11:40 PM, Andy Fitzsimon wrote:
>> Reckon there's a frantion of a cha
Totally agree.
We need to help as much as we can to improve their format out in the
open.
A good motivation is to get as much public prior art into their spec
as possible to ensure this thing is free for all to use.
I haven't read anything yet but does someone know if the path and
style d
Reckon there's a frantion of a chance they make this an open
unrestricted standard?
On 09/05/2009, at 1:19 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2009/05/thoughts_on_fxg.html
>
> Alexandre
> ___
> CREATE mailing list
> CREATE@
Please do look at...we need your expertise to respomd inkind...
Jon Phillips
+1.415.830.3884 (global)
+86.132.6817.8381 (beijing)
j...@rejon.org
On May 10, 2009 8:51 AM, "Boudewijn Rempt" wrote:
On Saturday 09 May 2009, Jon Phillips wrote: > Its going to be very hard to
compete with FXG becaus.
On Saturday 09 May 2009, Jon Phillips wrote:
> Its going to be very hard to compete with FXG because of Adobe's
> standing, so we need to ascertain if we are going to go it alone, try
> to get FXG spec repaired, or if we even have the energy to complete
> OpenRaster to make it better than FXG, som
Crap! I pitched openraster to some at adobe awhile ago, but seems go
it alone happens again...arg...even though in the blog post, says they
are "developing" the standard, so possibilities to talk with them
directly about problems with the spec, should be taken, first from
behind the scenese, before
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2009/05/thoughts_on_fxg.html
Alexandre
___
CREATE mailing list
CREATE@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
27 matches
Mail list logo
