Return-Path: <tiff-bounces@remotesensing.org>
Received: from inmx008.isp.belgacom.be (inmx008.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.3.88])
        by mailst034.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-MAILSTORE-2.14) with ESMTP id i8GJZOkA005563
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 21:35:24 +0200
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@remotesensing.org>)
Received: from xserve.flids.com (adsl-065-083-169-202.sip.mco.bellsouth.net [65.83.169.202])
        by inmx008.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-2.32) with ESMTP id i8GJZAQx023486
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 21:35:11 +0200
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@remotesensing.org>)
Received: from adsl-065-083-169-202.sip.mco.bellsouth.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by xserve.flids.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id AB1012F094C; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 15:34:56 -0400 (EDT)
X-Original-To: tiff@remotesensing.org
Delivered-To: tiff@remotesensing.org
Received: from outmx002.isp.belgacom.be (outmx002.isp.belgacom.be
	[195.238.3.52])
	by xserve.flids.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E1A2F0928
	for <tiff@remotesensing.org>; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 15:34:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outmx002.isp.belgacom.be (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by outmx002.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with
	ESMTP id i8GJYoe2021847
	for <tiff@remotesensing.org>; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 21:34:50 +0200
	(envelope-from <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>)
Received: from dfgrrxsknr4e (195.37-200-80.adsl.skynet.be [80.200.37.195])
	by outmx002.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with SMTP
	id i8GJYlB9021810; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 21:34:47 +0200
	(envelope-from <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>)
Message-ID: <000c01c49c24$736d11a0$c325c850@dfgrrxsknr4e>
From: "Joris" <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>
To: "Frank Warmerdam" <warmerdam@pobox.com>
References: <001c01c49c21$2bf33730$c325c850@dfgrrxsknr4e>
	<4149E83B.8040402@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 21:36:22 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Cc: Tiff mailing list <tiff@remotesensing.org>
X-BeenThere: tiff@remotesensing.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2
Precedence: list
List-Id: TIFF and libtiff discussion  <tiff.remotesensing.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xserve.flids.com/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@remotesensing.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://xserve.flids.com/pipermail/tiff>
List-Post: <mailto:tiff@remotesensing.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tiff-request@remotesensing.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://xserve.flids.com/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@remotesensing.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: tiff-bounces@remotesensing.org
Errors-To: tiff-bounces@remotesensing.org
X-UIDL: 402c0e19942b5b1d93179aa43b33f984

> My suggestion is that the tag size (aka count field) should be only 4 bytes

I suggest that, in order to reach a quick and firm decision, we count votes.

I personally abstain.

This makes

1 vote for 4 byte tag size
vs 0 for 8 byte tag size

1 vote for 8 byte Tile/Strip ByteCounts
vs 0 votes for 4 byte Tile/Strip ByteCounts

I will not be counting votes for the size of the 'number of tags' member, since
it is not a separate issue: if votes yield giving up on alignment, it will need
to revert to 2 bytes, otherwise, it will need to stay 8 bytes wide.

Anyone object to this voting or the proposed way to count them? If not, please
state your votes.


Joris Van Damme
info@awaresystems.be
http://www.awaresystems.be
Download your free TIFF tag viewer for windows here:
http://www.awaresystems.be/imaging/tiff/astifftagviewer.html

_______________________________________________
Tiff mailing list
Tiff@remotesensing.org
http://xserve.flids.com/mailman/listinfo/tiff
