204288 - libpng.org - Work with W3C on implementation of animated PNG (MNG) recommendation

Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

(Tech Evangelism Graveyard :: English US, defect)

Description

[Skewer]

Currently the W3C has a PNG recommendation which has become widely accepted as
the alternative to GIF. GIF is deprecated now because of Unisys patent issues
and general dislike. Without GIF there is no widely accepted means of delivering
animated images on webpages (Macromedia Flash is proprietary for-profit software
and video files are much too large for the internet).

I think that Mozilla should become involved with W3C and the libmng authors to
work on formulating a recommendation that will open the MNG format up to
widespread use. Once a W3C recommendation is created I predict that image
software like Photoshop will begin to support the format, and ultimately we will
even see it in other browsers (IE, Konqueror, etc.).

Comment 1

[Gerard Juyn]

Konqueror already contains native MNG support AFAIK.

Comment 2

[Glenn Randers-Pehrson]

The MNG spec is written in W3C's format.  However, recently I was informed
that W3C is not planning to issue a W3C Recommendation for MNG because it
isn't their own inhouse work.

PNG was an exception to that rule which perhaps they now regret.
Note that W3C also has not allowed us to update the PNG Recommendation to
the 1.1 and 1.2 versions which we issued in 1999.  W3C did however participate
in upgrading the PNG spec to ISO status, which was approved on March 25 2003
and is now "in publication".

Glenn

Comment 3

[Greg Roelofs]

Glenn's remarks (comment #2) suggest that the W3C dislikes the PNG and MNG
specs, which is not at all the case.  (Actually, I don't know what the general
feeling about MNG is, but at least some W3C folks favor it.)  Rather, they have
adopted a policy--an eminently reasonable one--that forbids external entities
(think large corporations and special interests) from presenting _any_ spec as a
fait accompli to be rubber-stamped by the Consortium.  PNG was created before
the W3C even had a standardization process, and it was approved before all of
the current rules and procedures were in place, but the fact that it would not
fit within the current framework does not make it any less valid of a spec. 
Note that GIF has never been standardized by any organization, yet it is
effectively a component of the W3C's HTML specs and the IETF's MIME specs solely
by virtue of its popularity.

That said, Chris Lilley has noted that it's possible the W3C could register some
new MIME types--possibly including video/mng and image/jng--with the IETF, if
and when draft-freed-mime-p4-00.txt gets approved.  There are, as yet, no
procedures to do that in place on either side, but people are working on it.

There's also ISO/IEC, whose version of the PNG spec is just about finalized (and
which, as an aside, will finally lead to the update of the W3C's PNG
Recommendation).  In principle, MNG could be standardized as an amendment to
that.  Of course, given the insanely slow process the PNG portion endured, I
shudder to think what it would take to get such an amendment under way.  But
it's a possibility, anyway.

Greg

Comment 4

[Glenn Randers-Pehrson]

I didn't mean to imply W3C doesn't like PNG or MNG.  I only meant they
may regret having approved the PNG Recommendation before they had their
current policy in place.

Appending the MNG spec to the existing ISO PNG spec is an interesting
notion, but I agree that it would probably take a very long time.

Glenn

Comment 5

[Susie Wyshak]

-->emeyer

Comment 6

[Skewer]

   Of course, given the insanely slow process the PNG portion endured, I
   shudder to think what it would take to get such an amendment under way.
   But it's a possibility, anyway.

The good thing about standards is you don't have to wait for them to be finished
before you start using them. And the fact that a standard for MNG is underway
will encourage software and browser developers to start supporting it before it
becomes standardized.

Comment 7

[Glenn Randers-Pehrson]

FYI, several days ago W3C published the second edition of PNG Proposed
Recommendation as http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-PNG-20030520/
which is essentially the same as the ISO specification for PNG that was approved
a few weeks ago and is now "in publication".  Note, this is the spec for
single-image PNG, and it doesn't mention MNG or JNG.

Comment 8

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

tech evang june 2003 reorg

Comment 9

[user-mozilla-bugzilla]

Any progress?  It may take a very long time, but it'll take even longer if it's not started...  And it's been nearly 4 years since that was being talked about, so...  curious.

Comment 10

[Glenn Randers-Pehrson]

No progress with W3C.  They are no longer interested in blessing specifications
that they didn't write, themselves.  I had made some progress with IETF but
that got derailed by mozilla's dropping MNG (IETF wants to see some major
applications using a format before they approve it).  IETF did agree to
approve "video/vnd-something-mng" but somehow that didn't happen either.

Comment 11

[Chris Lawson (gone)]

INCOMPLETE due to lack of activity since the end of 2009.

If someone is willing to investigate the issues raised in this bug to determine whether they still exist, *and* work with the site in question to fix any existing issues, please feel free to re-open and assign to yourself.

Sorry for the bugspam; filter on "NO MORE PRE-2010 TE BUGS" to remove.