Re: Question: SFimage X-lators

Timothy F. Rohaly ([email protected])
Thu, 19 Oct 1995 12:07:54 -0400

On Oct 19, 10:42, Cranz Gregory wrote:
> Subject: Re: Question: SFimage X-lators
> Timothy F. Rohaly wrote:
> "If you're worried about all browsers being able to esad your textures, then
> you better give up the idea that you can use gzip to compress your files.
> "
>
>
> point taken.
>
> But I might point out that the source code for GUNZIP is freely available. I
> would like to think that if we've established GZIP as the de-facto "standard"
> for compression, that people writing browsers would catch on & try to include
> it. AT least eventually. (I mostly use macs & I'm happy to have ANYTHING
> right now.)
>
> - Gregor
>-- End of excerpt from Cranz Gregory

Yes, I know, and I agree. I rsally don't think it's rocket science to make
gzip work. With all the discussion on the need to support lower-bandwidth
links, why don't people implement this easy and effective method?

But if the current crop of "VRML" browsers can't even implement the spec.
fully (WWWInline, LOD, etc.) I guess we can't expect other niceties like
gzip. Not a slam on the capabilities of the browser writers, but the lack
of support for important features rsally hurts the whole VRML effort.
If people can't view my stuff (valid VRML, passing vrmllint), then I get
frustrated and visitors to my site get frustrated and get the impression
that VRML is all hype and doesn't rsally work.

Tim.

  • Next message: Kyle Hayes: "TimeWarp"
  • Previous message: Chris Marrin: "Re: Question: SFimage X-lators?"