AWARE [SYSTEMS] Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer
AWare Systems, Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer, Home TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive

LibTiff Mailing List

TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive
April 2006

Previous Thread
Next Thread

Previous by Thread
Next by Thread

Previous by Date
Next by Date

Contact

The TIFF Mailing List Homepage
This list is run by Frank Warmerdam
Archive maintained by AWare Systems



Valid HTML 4.01!



Thread

2006.04.19 10:45 "TIFF + Group4 will last 10 years?", by Rui Castro
2006.04.19 11:40 "Re: TIFF + Group4 will last 10 years?", by Leonard Rosenthol
2006.04.19 19:26 "Re: TIFF + Group4 will last 10 years?", by Glenn Widener
2006.04.19 21:03 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Leonard Rosenthol
2006.04.19 21:22 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Bob Friesenhahn
2006.04.19 21:38 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Leonard Rosenthol
2006.04.19 21:52 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Bob Friesenhahn
2006.04.19 22:47 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Leonard Rosenthol
2006.04.19 23:05 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Bob Friesenhahn
2006.04.19 23:27 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Leonard Rosenthol
2006.04.19 23:34 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Graeme Gill
2006.04.19 23:41 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Graeme Gill
2006.05.01 01:34 "JBIG2 patent situation", by Glenn Widener
2006.05.01 16:07 "Re: JBIG2 patent situation", by Dwight Kelly
2006.04.20 07:30 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Brad Hards
2006.04.19 11:49 "Re: TIFF + Group4 will last 10 years?", by Rocky Pulley
2006.04.19 12:40 "Re: TIFF + Group4 will last 10 years?", by Gerben Vos
2006.04.20 20:27 "Re: TIFF + Group4 will last 10 years?", by <melser.anton@gmail.com>

2006.04.19 21:03 "Re: PDF/A vs. TIFF", by Leonard Rosenthol

At 03:26 PM 4/19/2006, Glenn Widener wrote:
> I'd rather ask, why use PDF/A?

Because it's a PUBLISHED, SUPPORTED and DOCUMENTED 
international standard.  While TIFF (regardless of the excellent work 
of Chris Cox and this group) remains a privately held/controlled and 
(not completely) documented specification.


> It's at least an order of magnitude more complex than TIFF,

Actually, starting from scratch - I'd say it's a toss up.

And there are enough excellent open source libraries for PDF 
in your choice of languages just as there is for TIFF.

So again, I'd dispute that.


> to no benefit, particularly for mononcrome images (unless you need 
> to include searchable text or embed arbitrary metadata in your image file).

MUCH smaller file sizes courtesy of JBIG2! And the 
possibility of JPEG2000 for color images. PLUS, the ability to 
do "image segmentation" to use the optimal compression for each 
component of a multi-element page (eg. text vs. pictures on a newspaper page).

And, as you note, such (pretty) important things as 
searchable text and metadata.


> PDF/A is new, relatively unproven, and exists to solve problems with 
> PDF as an archive format.

Actually, it exists to solve the problem of archiving ANY 
electronic data - SPECIFICALLY as an replacement for TIFF in places 
such as the National Archives, US Court system, etc.   They were the 
biggest proponents and supporters of PDF/A from the beginning.  And 
many places are no longer accepting TIFF files - and if they are, the 
first thing they do is convert it to PDF.

Don't get me wrong - TIFF serves a variety of purposes, but 
long time archival storage is NOT one of them.


> If you were to invent an extension to TIFF called "TIFF/A", to add 
> functionality that PDF/A has and TIFF lacks, what would you add and how?

The main advantage over PDF/A over PDF for archival storage 
is that it is a RESTRICTED SUBSET that is VERY tightly 
controlled.  The most IMPORTANT thing you could do with TIFF/A would 
be to do the same. Remove/disallow anything that is ambigious...


Leonard

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Rosenthol                            <mailto:leonardr@pdfsages.com>
Chief Technical Officer                      <http://www.pdfsages.com>
PDF Sages, Inc.                              215-938-7080 (voice)
                                              215-938-0880 (fax)