Den 2009-06-16 16:37 skrev Pierre Ossman: > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:24:07 +0200 > Peter Rosin <p...@lysator.liu.se> wrote: > >> Den 2009-06-16 14:00 skrev Pierre Ossman: >>> And do we want to make this a generic extension? Perhaps call it "Lossy >>> Quality Level..." instead? >> I don't think we should rename it, but the ZYWRLE encoding reuses this >> pseudo-encoding... >> > > If that encoding doesn't use JPEG (which I suspect it doesn't), then > that supports renaming the extension to something more generic.
It doesn't. The lossy part is a wavelet compressor. And from what I have gathered from the zywrle code, it's not a hint either. The decompressor has to behave differently depending on the quality level (at least I think it has to). That has to be described when/if the zywrle encoding is added to the spec. The reason I'm not backing the name change is that the one registering the encoding gets to decide the name, IMHO. And the zywrle (ab)use should not interfere with that. The main problem is that I suspect that the tight levels have been experimented with a lot so that you get a good tradeoff in most situations. Just hooking new encodings into those levels is not easy, you should aim for the same tradeoffs for new encodings so that they match the tradeoffs in the tight server implementation. Otherwise the client will not know what levels to request in a particular bandwidth situation. Since this is hard, has probably not been done with the only other (ab)user etc, I don't think it is fair to change the name of the pseudo-encoding. > I'm not sure how useful these settings are though when their meaning is > so undefined... If you want to match what the tight project is doing, my description is certainly better than nothing. But sure, we could check exactly how the tight server behaves with different quality/compression levels and list that in the spec. Cheers, Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects _______________________________________________ tigervnc-rfbproto mailing list tigervnc-rfbproto@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-rfbproto
