Return-Path: owner-tiff@olympiakos.com
Return-Path: <owner-tiff@olympiakos.com>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by at1895.spb.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -1) with ESMTP id f969tAWQ031758
	for <dron@localhost>; Sat, 6 Oct 2001 14:29:10 +0400
Received: from eudoramail.com [209.185.123.45]
	by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for dron@localhost (single-drop); Sat, 06 Oct 2001 14:29:10 +0400 (MSD)
Received: from gate7.olympiakos.com ([207.176.88.85]) by shared1-mail.whowhere.com; Fri Oct  5 12:13:07 2001
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA09324;
	Fri, 5 Oct 2001 14:59:46 -0400
Received: by gate7.olympiakos.com (bulk_mailer v1.9); Fri, 5 Oct 2001 14:59:08 -0400
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA09281
	for tiff-outgoing; Fri, 5 Oct 2001 14:59:08 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: gate7.olympiakos.com: majordom set sender to owner-tiff@olympiakos.com using -f
Received: from relay.planetinternet.be (relay.planetinternet.be [194.119.232.24])
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA09278
	for <tiff@olympiakos.com>; Fri, 5 Oct 2001 14:59:05 -0400
Received: from planetinternet.be (u212-239-164-30.adsl.pi.be [212.239.164.30])
	by relay.planetinternet.be (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f95IwVJ29617;
	Fri, 5 Oct 2001 20:58:31 +0200
Message-ID: <3BBE01ED.D4202530@planetinternet.be>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 20:54:37 +0200
From: Joris Van Damme <as.van.damme.joris@planetinternet.be>
Organization: AWare Systems
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en-gb] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Bostrup, Tore" <TBostrup@teamia.com>,
   TIFF Mailing List <tiff@olympiakos.com>
Subject: Re: OJPEG & Wang Images (long)
References: <A49C73B04A70D211B75E00805FAD949C5D627B@TIANT01>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-tiff@olympiakos.com
Status: RO
Content-Length: 983
Lines: 23

"Bostrup, Tore" wrote:
> That's a religious discussion.  The fact of the matter is that it is out
> there, however unfortunate and/or non-standard that may be.

I partially agree. Discussions about specs always tend to ressemble
'religious discussions'.

> I'm not in complete disagreement, I just wanted to point out that releasing
> a new standard (in this case TIFF 7.0) doesn't really solve the problem that
> the format is in use and "pretends" to be standard - at least not in the
> foreseeable future.

Agreed. The single point where I dissagree with you is that, in my
opinion, there is not solution except letting TIFF 6.0 jpeg compression
die pretty much the same way the complete file format is dieing at the
moment. Despite of all the wonderfull efforts, experience shows that a
truelly good and fail-proof tiff 6.0 jpeg reader that can handle the
different tiff 6.0 jpeg compressed files out there and can anticipate
future incarnations is simply not possible.



Joris

