Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review
Paul Libbrecht <paul@hoplahup.net> Tue, 04 May 2021 20:21 UTC
Return-Path: <paul@hoplahup.net>
X-Original-To: media-types@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: media-types@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE0913A11CA
for <media-types@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 May 2021 13:21:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001,
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 9rJ-2JnKNMlB for <media-types@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Tue, 4 May 2021 13:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 8.mo178.mail-out.ovh.net (8.mo178.mail-out.ovh.net
[46.105.74.227])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DD533A11C4
for <media-types@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 May 2021 13:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from player772.ha.ovh.net (unknown [10.110.115.182])
by mo178.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 531DACF829
for <media-types@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 May 2021 22:21:02 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hoplahup.net (p5dc6f2bc.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.198.242.188])
(Authenticated sender: paul@hoplahup.net)
by player772.ha.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7CC951DE0FC75;
Tue, 4 May 2021 20:21:00 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass
(GARM-100R00373ec45fe-7575-440f-9e43-30e78be6f376,
E466FF311CCCA5DCD24B9EA5F81C649C6290E9B2) smtp.auth=paul@hoplahup.net
X-OVh-ClientIp: 93.198.242.188
From: "Paul Libbrecht" <paul@hoplahup.net>
To: "James Zern" <jzern=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: media-types@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 04 May 2021 22:20:58 +0200
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r5757)
Message-ID: <2768E5BB-6BDB-4CBE-9006-C0190101B91D@hoplahup.net>
In-Reply-To: <CABWgkXJnMuM6+D5wVB5-9uDBqqwesNyW9jOwyOZ8en-igYpi-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABWgkXLTfprJtQE4G1Uk7wGLd18cmSBM3RLiuyd1rbiHbyUJWA@mail.gmail.com>
<03CAC457-FD86-4D97-B10A-FE0CA447C5C7@hoplahup.net>
<CABWgkXJnMuM6+D5wVB5-9uDBqqwesNyW9jOwyOZ8en-igYpi-Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_MailMate_4D15BC0A-3465-43DA-ABA9-FA2CCA49BA89_="
X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 12442601347919972455
X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK
X-VR-SPAMSCORE: 0
X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvdefiedgudeglecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjpdevjffgvefmvefgnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucehtddtnecunecujfgurhephffvufffoffkjghfgggtsegrtdhmreertdejnecuhfhrohhmpedfrfgruhhlucfnihgssghrvggthhhtfdcuoehprghulheshhhophhlrghhuhhprdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeeitdevudffvedtveekhfelledtgeekhffgveevvdeggfdvgeetfeejvdekheetjeenucffohhmrghinheprghpphhlvgdrtghomhdpmhhitghrohhsohhfthdrtghomhdptghouggvphhrohhjvggtthdrtghomhenucfkpheptddrtddrtddrtddpleefrdduleekrddvgedvrddukeeknecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhpqdhouhhtpdhhvghlohepphhlrgihvghrjeejvddrhhgrrdhovhhhrdhnvghtpdhinhgvtheptddrtddrtddrtddpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehprghulheshhhophhlrghhuhhprdhnvghtpdhrtghpthhtohepmhgvughirgdqthihphgvshesihgvthhfrdhorhhg
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/media-types/TwTSQQKqWPsg1yJ-pNs0R5uSlKU>
Subject: Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review
X-BeenThere: media-types@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IANA mailing list for reviewing Media Type \(MIME Type,
Content Type\) registration requests." <media-types.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/media-types>,
<mailto:media-types-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/media-types/>
List-Post: <mailto:media-types@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:media-types-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/media-types>,
<mailto:media-types-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 May 2021 20:21:10 -0000
Hello James, On 4 May 2021, at 2:33, James Zern wrote: >> com.google.webp sounds to be an Apple Uniform Type Identifier >> <https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Miscellaneous/Reference/UTIRef/> >> . >> Is that correct? >> > Yes. I found that when looking for something as a replacement for the > deprecated Macintosh code as you mention [3]. I notice now that its > value > is 'org.webmproject.webp' not 'com.google.webp', however. Fantastic. >> - Macintosh Uniform Type Identifier: com.google.webp conforms to >> public.image and to public.data. >> >> > I think mentioning the direct relationship to public.image may be best > given you can follow it upwards past public.data. And maybe 'Apple > Uniform > Type Identifier' would be more appropriate now. Excellent and a very good point of changing Macintosh to Apple. >> - Windows Clipboard Flavour Name: WebP >> > I didn't see a registered reference for a standard clipboard format, > but > GDI was updated to support the format with the ImageFormatWEBP GUID > [4] . I asked the person I know has been working close to that for Math and he indicated that GDI does not seem to contain clipboard https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/dataxchg/standard-clipboard-formats would be the list of standard clipboard types. And webP is not inside there. I also do not find it at [this codeproject page](https://www.codeproject.com/reference/1091137/windows-clipboard-formats). From searching around about GDI and clipboard, it seems that the only way to copy with a GDI bitmap is to transfer it as a buffer. I would suspect, that it does not preserve the WebP characteristics for which you would need to write to a stream of bytes. All examples I found only copy BMP. Thanks Paul
- [media-types] image/webp rfc review James Zern
- Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review Erik Wilde
- Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review Chris Lilley
- Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review Paul Libbrecht
- Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review James Zern
- Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review James Zern
- Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review Paul Libbrecht
- Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review James Zern
- Re: [media-types] image/webp rfc review Paul Libbrecht