2010.01.15 13:40 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Phil Harvey
- 2010.01.15 14:05 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Leonard Rosenthol
-
2010.01.15 15:48 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Adam Goode
-
2010.01.18 18:04 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Phil Harvey
-
2010.01.19 16:15 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2010.01.19 17:29 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Phil Harvey
- 2010.01.19 18:55 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Toby Thain
- 2010.01.19 22:50 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Christopher
-
2010.01.20 13:41 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Gary McGath
-
2010.01.20 21:55 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Chris Cox
- 2010.01.20 23:37 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Gary McGath
-
2010.01.20 21:55 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Chris Cox
-
2010.01.19 16:15 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2010.01.18 18:04 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Phil Harvey
- 2010.02.04 17:35 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Phil Harvey
2010.01.18 18:04 "Re: [Tiff] eta for bigtiff support?", by Phil Harvey
On 15-Jan-10, at 12:00 PM, tiff-request@lists.maptools.org wrote:
What's wrong with "image/tiff" and "TIF"? GIF doesn't have different MIME types and extensions for its different versions.
This has been debated before, and probably will be debated again, but my opinion is that a new file type is needed.
Technically, according to the TIFF 6 specification, the 0x002a in the TIFF header is a file identifier. So this can not be used as a version number because any file with a different number is not a TIFF file according to the specification.
This is different than GIF, which defined "87a" as a version number in the original specification.
- Phil