wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: WWP on Linux!
yuval levy 2007-Jul-05 14:52:00
Hi Michel,
thanks for the detailed analysis of the "exotic"
content.
--- michel thoby <#removed#> wrote:
> Cylindrical is unfortunately less and less
> considered as a standard
> to be mandatorily supported by viewer development.
No. Cylindrical is intended to be fully supported in
freepv. There are two reason why it lags behind
Cubical and Spherical:
1. it has more complex requirements, some of which are
also an option for the cube and the sphere such as
tilt limits. it can be seen as a special case of the
more generic sphere/cube.
2. lack of development resources forces the project to
focus / prioritize. The cube and sphere geometries
have higher priority, also because it is possible to
represent a cylinder in them (at the authoring stage)
but not the other way around.
> (Cylindrical + Cinepak) combo:
I don't know if there is an OpenSource implementation
of Cinepak. If there is, it is again a matter of
time/resources to add it to freepv.
> I believe this is "the" true
> legacy available standard and not the reverse!
I am not sure I understand this sentence. Do you mean
that most existing QTVR content out there is
Cyl+Cinepak? surfing the web today with freepv tells a
different story. All what freepv can display is JPG in
QTVR and there is plenty of it.
Maybe the older Cinepak based stuff has been retired
(it's so sad when excellent content such as the Sydney
Opera Tour get retired and disappears without a
trace).
Anyway, the point I am making is not which one is a
legacy (=old, outdated, unsupported) format, but which
legacy format has the higher probability of being
carried along in the future.
Yuv
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC