Status: Read
Received: from phillip.thumbsplus.com by phillip.thumbsplus.com (NTMail 3.02.11) with ESMTP id pcrews for <pcrews@cerious.com>; Fri, 2 May 1997 19:35:00 -0400
Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by sgi.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id QAA17741; Fri, 2 May 1997 16:11:21 -0700
	env-from (owner-tiff@sgi.engr.sgi.com)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) id OAA24016 for tiff-list; Fri, 2 May 1997 14:22:31 -0700
Received: from sgi.sgi.com (sgi.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.37]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id OAA23991 for <tiff-relay@relay.engr.sgi.com>; Fri, 2 May 1997 14:22:29 -0700
Received: from hq15.pcmail.ingr.com (hq15.pcmail.ingr.com [129.135.251.243]) by sgi.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) via SMTP id OAA22243
	for <tiff@sgi.com>; Fri, 2 May 1997 14:22:24 -0700
	env-from (egrissom@ingr.com)
Received: by hq15.pcmail.ingr.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63)
	id <01BC5715.5A384C60@hq15.pcmail.ingr.com>; Fri, 2 May 1997 16:24:47 -0500
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=INTERGRAPH%l=HQ5-970502212444Z-31919@hq15.pcmail.ingr.com>
From: "Grissom, Ed" <egrissom@ingr.com>
To: "'tiff@sgi.com'" <tiff@sgi.com>,
        "'ndr@tazboy.jpl.nasa.gov'"
	 <ndr@tazboy.jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: RE: BIG TIFF file problems
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 16:24:44 -0500
X-Mailer:  Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63
Sender: owner-tiff@fddi-sgi.engr.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk

In a previous message, Niles writes:

>Ed Grissom writes (regarding <4GB TIFF limitation),
>>  If anyone knows about plans for getting around either of these problems
>>  in TIFF 7.0, I'd sure like to hear about them.
>
>I doubt it will make the TIFF 7.0 spec, which is under review
>somewhere (are you still out there, Brian?).  TIFF 8.0 maybe. 

Are there any raster file formats that address this issue ?  I have not
found any.  If this is not to be addressed in TIFF 7.0, we may take
Niles B.O.t.E. design and begin generating (not for general interchange)
64-bit addressable TIFF-type images.  Anyone want to add to the design ?

I have heard hints of TIFF 7.0 in the works at Adobe.  Am I remembering
wrong, or wasn't there much more discussion on this list (or another ad
hoc one) prior to the release of the TIFF 6.0 spec ?  Does anyone know
if Adobe plans for any public comment period for TIFF 7.0 or, even
better, a discussion of what is desired in TIFF 7.0 ?  Perhaps I missed
it.

> I would venture to say that to change this part of
>TIFF would require changing the version number from 42 to 56.
>(a gin-and-tonic to the first person to get this obscure half-joke).

Using up all the numbers in the old Chicago song "25 or 6 to 4" ?

TIFF 6.0 - 6x7 = 42
TIFF 8.0 - 8x7 = 56  ?

--
ed grissom
egrissom@ingr.com

