I'm beginning with WML development, but I hate that the only option that we have for images are the WBMP format, that is only grayscale, then I want to know if there is any way to have colored images using WAP 1.x(not the new 2.x versions of it).
Standard colour image formats such as BMP, PNG, JPEG, GIF and animated GIF were supported in the Openwave browsers (certainly Openwave Mobile Browser v6), which were shipped on a huge number of WAP mobile phones. I think it a reasonable assumption that other WAP browsers have similar support.
Beware that some browsers may not support certain advanced features of these formats e.g. progressive display/download in GIF, PNG and JPEG.
So you should be able to do e.g.:
<img alt="text" src="url" />
where the URL specifies a BMP, PNG, JPEG, GIF, animated GIF etc.
The Openwave browsers also allowed img elements within do and option elements as a non-standard extension to WML.
Related
Here is a PNG that I converted from .ico format using macOS Preview.app. It kind of flashes when viewed in Safari or Chrome on my Mac. It is not supposed to be animated.
I filed this as a bug (rdar://24844825, mirrored on OpenRadar here) back in February 2016.
It is still happening, and in fact now it happens in Chrome as well.
What is causing this png to be displayed as if it were animated? That "shouldn’t" be possible with PNG!
What is causing this png to be displayed as if it were animated? That "shouldn’t" be possible with PNG!
That's true for a PNG, but not an APNG, which is what you have here.
An Animated PNG is an extension of the PNG format which allows for animation similar to an animated GIF.
Apple adopted the format in 2016 for their animated stickers, which may explain why Preview has the ability to read and write them. It seems it took the different resolutions stored in the ICO and saved them as multiple frames of an APNG.
You can remove the frame you don't want by opening the PNG in Preview, selecting the frame you don't want, and pressing the delete key.
The Open Type font format standard 1.7 officially supports three types of colored glyphs, as required for emojis. As of late 2016, version 1.8 has added support for another variant. Platform support varies:
Microsoft’s/Mozilla’s COLR/CPAL tables use standard Truetype glyf or Postscript CFF outlines.
Mozilla’s/Adobe’s/W3C’s SVG table uses SVG outlines and CSS Variables.
Google’s CBDT/CBLC tables use embedded PNG bitmaps.
Apple’s sbix table uses embedded PNG, JPEG or TIFF bitmaps (and PDFs outside the standard). Support for masks and aliases is planned.
The SVG table explicitly considers animation – using CSS, JS, SMIL or embedded files – but I’m not sure that has been implemented anywhere yet:
Glyph Rendering
The SVG glyph descriptions may be rendered statically or with animation enabled.
Does any of the PNG-based implementations support animation using APNG? How about tools?
Compressed Color Bitmaps
Images for each individual glyph are stored as straight PNG data. Only the following chunks are allowed in such PNG data: IHDR, PLTE, tRNS, sRGB, IDAT, and IEND. If other chunks are present, the behavior is undefined.
JFTR, APNG relies on three additional chunks which both OS X / macOS and iOS natively support:
acTL Animation Control
fcTL Frame Control
fdAT Frame Data
So, if I’m not mistaken, APNGs should work in sbix verbatim, but not in CBDT.
APNG seems to be supported in Firefox and Safari only, so that'll be the same when used as font glyphs.
I figure you already considered this, but if GIF suffices, your best bet would be OpenType SVG. It has the widest support, and you can embed bitmap images in the SVG: see glyph 0050 in this test font.
Regarding non-bitmap animations in OpenType SVG, unfortunately you can't use JavaScript animations, and with SMIL on the way out you're stuck with CSS animations... which don't currently work in Firefox and Edge 🙃
As we all know that jpg image format does not support transparency.
so we use .png format.
i was surfing on net and i found an image with .jpg format and
transparent. it is wonder how a jpg format image can be transparent.
here is the example image.
http://bdthemes.net/demo/joomla/intensy/images/sampledata/features/top_b.jpg
The provided example image is in fact not a JPEG, but a png file.
It has the extension and mime-type of a jpeg file, but it's contents are in png format.
JPEG file format does not support transparacy.
So if you need transparancy in images for use in browsers.
You can either:
convert the image to png, this works in all browsers
use ZorroSVG, requires SVG support but results in smaller files for photographic images.
use webp, only use when you have fallbacks in place for browsers that do not support webp.
The new JPEG-XR standard supports transparency.
However, this is not a real JPG, it's a PNG. If you rename it to .txt, you can see that the contents of the file start with PNG:
check its mime type, it must be renamed .png to .jpg
I was wondering what image formats (aside from the basic JPEG, GIF, PNG) the major browsers would support, especially Chrome, Firefox, and Webkit. If anyone can provide a link to a list somewhere (that is updated frequently to cope with the frequent updates recently) that would be great. Support for other formats (like document and video) would also be nice.
I feel like this information should be listed somewhere, but I didn't find any such thing when I searched.
Here is a nice resource: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers#Image_format_support
Major image file support
.bmp, .jpg, .jpeg, .png, .gif
New
.webp
The image format supported in popular browsers: BMP, SVG, JPG, PNG and GIF. There is no two format jpeg or jpg, it's one with multiple extensions used due to see here.
Note: SVG(Simple Vector Graphics) can produced much smaller images but allows only vector images(no raster).
Next, the other formats used are webp and jpeg2000.
Webp:- Supported by many browsers such as Chrome, Opera. There is an issue running for Firefox support here. Note that, Webp can reduce the image memory size to around 30-40% of the original size(in our experiments) on an average. This doesn't means always as sometimes we have seen transcoded webp from jpegs to go beyond the original jpeg size. The output image had no visual difference compared to original jpegs. My suggestion: serve webp where possible, i.e. Chrome, Android, Opera.
JPEG2000:- This format is great. Resizing an image does not drop quality as much as JPEG. The problem is it's too computation intensive for decoding and the fact it came over a decade ago when hardware wasn't great(especially not meant for mobile). It still is used in some cameras as it results in smaller images.
Less popular but worth mentioning: BPG and FLIF. This will require using JS or other library to serve on web/app.
JPEG and PNG are supported by the every browser. But the new image format which is webP is only supported by the Chrome, and partially by the Firefox and not at all supported by the Safari at all. Thou WebP is really good as it does not compromise with the quality of the image and also reduce it to 25-35% less. But we cant still use it because it is less flexible in the different browser environment.
But you can look for the other image format also which are available and compatible for each browser type.
If i am making a image sharing service website using the standard file upload form what images can i say it supports, other then jpg, png, gif. Is there a list that shows what browsers supports what? I know that jpg png and gif are most common but what are the others. I want to be sure.
Honestly, that's pretty much all you should be concerned with. Any other file formats (like svg) are not widely supported enough.
I would suggest converting other types of files to those 3
Examples:
jpeg (simple renaming)
bmp
tiff
pcx