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.).
Konqueror already contains native MNG support AFAIK.
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
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
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
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.
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.
tech evang june 2003 reorg
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.
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.
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.