Thinking of a scanner
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Iphoto 08 to iPhoto 09
Next: Apple Tech Support?
From: Ben Shimmin on 23 Feb 2010 10:15 Geoff Berrow <blthecat(a)ckdog.co.uk>: > On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:58:18 +0000, > real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: > >>I've looked - that claim is purest bullshit. XML stinks and humans like >>me can't work out what's what inside an XML file. > > It is at least plain text but some XML files can be quite complex and > ar only designed to be machine read. The beauty of XML is that you [1] can quite easily write a program that will translate it into something else; XSLT (itself XML) is one good way of doing this. It wouldn't be much work to translate iPhoto's library's XML into, say, an HTML-based gallery using XSLT. b. [1] `you' in the sense of, well, someone like me or Woody, at least. -- <bas(a)bas.me.uk> <URL:http://bas.me.uk/> `It is like Swinburne sat down on his soul's darkest night and designed an organized sport.' -- David Foster Wallace, _Infinite Jest_, on American football
From: Rowland McDonnell on 23 Feb 2010 10:35 Geoff Berrow <blthecat(a)ckdog.co.uk> wrote: > real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: > > >I've looked - that claim is purest bullshit. XML stinks and humans like > >me can't work out what's what inside an XML file. > > It is at least plain text So's assembly language and C and C++ and all of them are about as clear as mud with added carbon black. (I can work with some of them, but XML leaves me baffled) >but some XML files can be quite complex and > ar only designed to be machine read. XML is meant to be machine-read and that's all it's meant for, surely? It's plain text so that experts can debug their own code and so on, or so I thought; and to make it easier to pass around the place. But the fact that XML happens to be plain text is only a convenience for the fully informed highly skilled expert programmers who have a need to work with XML and have taught themselves the extra skills on top of the ones they already have that are needed to do so. Normal human beings don't get a look-in. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 23 Feb 2010 10:35 Richard Tobin <richard(a)cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > >> According to the wiki article on jpeg2000, iPhoto *can* open it (even in > >> advanced mode). It seems only proprietary software can use jpeg2000 in > >> advanced mode. > > >Both open JPEG200s without having to select special advanced modes. > > I think he was referring to whether they can open "advanced" JPEG 2000 > files; see the tables at the end of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_2000 I'm puzzled by this. What is an `advanced' JPEG 2000? The Wikipaedia article states that it's a JPEG2000 that complies with pt 2 of the standard, but in the table here: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jpeg2000#JPEG_2000_image_coding_system_-_P arts> part 2 specifies filename extensions only, so it seems. So what the table seems to suggest is that only certain software `supports' the standard filename extensions described in part 2 of the JPEG2000 standard. Which is madness. So what have I got wrong? Ah. Wikipaedia is confusing and probably confused. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jpeg2000#File_format_and_code_stream> "The part-2 extension to JPEG2000, i.e., ISO/IEC 15444-2, also enriches this file format by including mechanisms for animation or composition of several code streams into one single image. Images in this extended file-format use the .jpx extension. There is no standardized extension for code-stream data because code-stream data is not to be considered to be stored in files in the first place, though when done for testing purposes, the extension .jpc or .j2k appear frequently." So `advanced' JPEG2000 files are to my mind better described as `extended' JPEG2000 files - extended to carry more than just an image per file,. Since one image per file is all I want from an image file format, I think I might totally ignore the `advanced' format (unless it starts to appear out there). Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 23 Feb 2010 10:42 Ben Shimmin <bas(a)llamaselector.com> wrote: > Geoff Berrow <blthecat(a)ckdog.co.uk>: [snip] > The beauty of XML is that you [1] can quite easily write a program > that will translate it into something else; XSLT (itself XML) is one > good way of doing this. > > It wouldn't be much work to translate iPhoto's library's XML into, say, > an HTML-based gallery using XSLT. > > b. > > [1] `you' in the sense of, well, someone like me or Woody, at least. Quite - someone who's a highly skilled programmer with decades of experience behind them on many different platforms, and who finds it easy to learn-by-inference from the source code. None of that applies to almost everyone on the planet. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 23 Feb 2010 10:50
Andy Hewitt <thewildrover(a)me.com> wrote: > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: [snip] > > According to the wiki article on jpeg2000, iPhoto *can* open it (even in > > advanced mode). It seems only proprietary software can use jpeg2000 in > > advanced mode. > > Hmm, I tried it in iPhoto 09, and I couldn't import them. MacOS X 10.6.2, iPhoto 09 v 8.1.1 (419): it's just opened the first JPEG2000 I threw at it. Drag and drop, no problems. Intel Core2Duo iMac. But I really don't get iPhoto at all. Can anyone explain what the point of it is? No, I don't get it from `watching it in action'. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking |