Return-Path: <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>
Received: from inas020.isp.belgacom.be (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by inav004.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-AV-3.00) with ESMTP id jA7JPG7G021125
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:25:16 +0100
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from inmx007.isp.belgacom.be (inmx007.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.5.89])
        by inas020.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-AS-2.03) with ESMTP id jA7JP84x003501
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:25:09 +0100
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from duke.maptools.org (r153.dmsolutions.ca [209.217.116.153] (may be forged))
        by inmx007.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-2.32) with ESMTP id jA7JP2wE017352
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:25:02 +0100
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from duke.maptools.org (duke.maptools.org [127.0.0.1])
	by duke.maptools.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id jA7JHqqH026573;
	Mon, 7 Nov 2005 14:19:13 -0500
Received: from outmx027.isp.belgacom.be (outmx027.isp.belgacom.be
	[195.238.2.208])
	by duke.maptools.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id jA7JHoXK026570
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 14:17:51 -0500
Received: from outmx027.isp.belgacom.be (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by outmx027.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with
	ESMTP id jA7JHj8Q006414
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:17:48 +0100
	(envelope-from <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>)
Received: from dfgrrxsknr4e (77-194.244.81.adsl.skynet.be [81.244.194.77])
	by outmx027.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with SMTP
	id jA7JHgVk006389; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:17:43 +0100
	(envelope-from <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>)
Message-ID: <001d01c5e3d0$066d5b60$4dc2f451@dfgrrxsknr4e>
From: "Joris" <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>
To: "Bob Friesenhahn" <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us>,
        "Frank Warmerdam" <warmerdam@pobox.com>
References: <75489204593.20051027094051@mail.ru><931f8ea90510270657g5007545dr443fc2b1c9855d58@mail.gmail.com><004401c5db6e$45290990$6501a8c0@black><931f8ea90510272042h20d5bb7qeead491c21b69a7c@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.60.0510272304200.7597@blade.simplesystems.org>
Subject: Re: [Tiff] How located pixels with BitsPerSample not bound to byte?
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:18:22 +0100
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 6.00.2800.1506
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506
Cc: TIFF mailing list <tiff@lists.maptools.org>
X-BeenThere: tiff@lists.maptools.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: TIFF and libtiff discussion <tiff.lists.maptools.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/private/tiff>
List-Post: <mailto:tiff@lists.maptools.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
Errors-To: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
X-UIDL: 000000000023ceae.00000dff
X-MSP-STORE: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 20:25:25 +0100
Status:   

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> I must admit to being dubious about this
> claim, and I believe that Joris is as well.  But if Adobe Photoshop
> CS2 does it, by-golly it must be right!

You misunderstood my feelings about byteswapping 24bit data...

All by itself, I do think the convention to byteswap this is
unfortunate, you got that right.

However, I feel it is much more important that we have a person or
organisation with authority, that jumps in when needed, and provides
standardized conventions for us. I mean, there is no 'right' or 'wrong'
(even if there is 'fortunate' and 'maybe less fortunate'), there is only
'convention', as in 'specification', or, much worse, the lack of it.

This is not the only issue where recently we discovered what I believe
is a 'hole' in the specification and needed a standardizing, descision
making organization. The other issue was whether or not to byteswap
image data that is not bytealigned (like when samples per pixel is for
example [3, 16, 7], for chunky planarconfiguration, which is not
possible in LibTiff, but legite in TIFF, and makes that the second
channel is of byteswapping width, but usually not byte aligned). In this
case too, Chris jumped in and made the descision we needed.

So, right, I don't think this particular choice he made is very
pleasing. But, the fact that he's here to make choices is what matters
most to me. Therefore, I don't wish to argue with Chris about this
issue, and I do wish we would just thank him and not doubt him. We need
him, he's the spec's representative amongst us mortals.


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@lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/
