-
2004.10.01 16:41 "[Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Ian Ameline
-
2004.10.01 16:53 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Frank Warmerdam
- 2004.10.01 17:01 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Joris Van Damme
-
2004.10.01 17:19 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Steve Carlsen
- 2004.10.01 17:27 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Chris Losinger
-
2004.10.01 17:48 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Joris Van Damme
- 2004.10.01 17:50 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Frank Warmerdam
-
2004.10.01 18:03 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Chris Losinger
-
2004.10.01 22:22 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Chris Cox
-
2004.10.02 01:21 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Joris Van Damme
- 2004.10.02 01:45 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.10.02 03:43 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Chris Cox
-
2004.10.02 04:10 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Joris Van Damme
- 2004.10.02 04:41 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.10.02 04:53 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Chris Cox
- 2004.10.02 10:28 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Andy Cave
-
2004.10.02 04:10 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Joris Van Damme
-
2004.10.02 01:21 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Joris Van Damme
-
2004.10.01 22:22 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Chris Cox
-
2004.10.01 16:53 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Frank Warmerdam
- 2004.10.02 10:20 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Andy Cave
- 2004.10.04 11:29 "[Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Rob van den Tillaart
- 2004.10.04 16:50 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Steve Carlsen
- 2004.10.04 18:30 "RE: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Bill Bither
- 2004.10.04 18:49 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Andy Cave
- 2004.10.04 18:59 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Andy Cave
2004.10.04 08:53 "Re: [Tiff] Re: BigTIFF extension issue", by Andy Cave
A laser printer which was Level 1 can print a "Level 2" file as long as the "Level 2" file is constrained to using Level 1 features.
Hi Bob.
An interesting point that one. If a .ps file contains only Level1 features, then surely one would say it's a Level1 PS file - not a Level 2 file.
Another interesting case - think of PDF - a PDF 1.4 file that only contains 1.3 code will more often than not NOT print on a RIP that works with PDF 1.3. That's because some RIPs check the version number and then error when they see 1.4 - even though all the 'commands' are 1.3. To make it work, you have to put in a version number of 1.3.
[Anyway, this is to a degree a mute point 'cause I rather abused the definition of backwards compatible.]
The simple argument I think is that all/most users will (probably) think of such a file as a TIFF file and that .tiff/.tif is what denotes a TIFF file.
I'm sure discussions could go on for lots of emails... I think the top 'N' people or so involved with LIBTIFF should make a decision. Once it's made, us programmers will get on and implement what ever is required!!
Andy.
PS I'm a programmer as well as running my own company.
Andy Cave,
Chief Executive Officer,
Hamillroad Software Limited.
www.hamillroad.com