- 2004.09.16 19:23 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Frank Warmerdam
- 2004.09.16 22:39 "[Tiff] Re: BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Ian Ameline
-
2004.09.17 00:09 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.09.17 00:32 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
-
2004.09.17 01:54 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2004.09.17 02:29 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.09.17 03:08 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Chris Cox
-
2004.09.17 04:20 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.09.17 04:39 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Chris Cox
-
2004.09.17 11:25 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
- 2004.09.17 14:31 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.09.17 11:25 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
-
2004.09.17 05:46 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Frank Warmerdam
-
2004.09.17 11:40 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
- 2004.09.17 13:11 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Frank Warmerdam
-
2004.09.17 15:10 "RE: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Fernando Loygorri
-
2004.09.17 15:10 "RE: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.09.17 15:55 "RE: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Fernando Loygorri
- 2004.09.17 16:00 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Frank Warmerdam
- 2004.09.17 16:13 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
- 2004.09.17 16:43 "RE: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2004.09.17 21:41 "RE: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Chris Cox
-
2004.09.17 15:55 "RE: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Fernando Loygorri
-
2004.09.17 15:10 "RE: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.09.17 11:40 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
- 2004.09.17 11:38 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
-
2004.09.17 04:39 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Chris Cox
-
2004.09.17 04:20 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2004.09.17 06:35 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Rob van den Tillaart
-
2004.09.17 01:54 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2004.09.17 00:32 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
- 2004.09.19 12:31 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Andrey Kiselev
- 2004.09.19 16:43 "Re: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Joris Van Damme
2004.09.17 15:10 "RE: [Tiff] BigTIFF Tag Value Count issue", by Fernando Loygorri
Does anyone know if stuff like PDA's and such have efficient-to-use 64bit integer datatypes? I am somewhat doubtful.
Java data types are all signed, so the maximum positive value of an 8-bit long is cut in half.
Is it allowable to have BigTIFF not work on those machines, > but have classic TIFF still in working order? Perhaps a structure like...
#ifdef BIGTIFF_SUPPORT
if file is tiff classic {
#endif
tiff classic supporting code
** this includes reporting error when suffering the consequences
of getting a BigTIFF file **
#ifdef BIGTIFF_SUPPORT
} else {
bigtiff supporting code
}
#endif
I understand that libtiff is written in C, but I believe that a TIFF specification should not assume anything about implementation languages.
If BigTIFF defines unsigned 64-bit quantities, it will make life for Java applications more difficult and possibly slower, although not impossible.
Regards,
FGL