Re: Binary standards for images and sounds

["Carl Edman" <>]

Kjetil Torgrim Homme <>:
> It is far more likely (and by far more easy to implement) that better
> quality audio will be transmitted than anyone will change the size of
> the images *and* handle variable sized images. (if the images aren't
> variable in size, there's no need to transmit this data every time.)

You will need variable sized images for 'big' monsters.  I think they  
should be just one ITEM but have a large image.

> Anyway - skipping a header for the audio data will save you _nothing_
> - audio files tend to be fairly large...

That was not to save bandwidth.  The reason for that suggestion was  
simplicity.

> Clients that want them, should get true XPM-files - that way if they
> want a persistent image cache, they don't need to keep one for each
> different screen type.

I thought *you* were the guy who said that you need different  
independent representation for black&white and color screens in _any_  
case.

> Indexed colours makes it more straightforward to represent
> transparancy. An alpha channel is overkill, IMHO.

If you want just simple transparency, require a 1-bit alpha channel.   
That is hardly overkill.

	Carl Edman