If it (ever) get's built in (but by default is turned off), then wouldn't it be fairly simple to make an extension which turns it on, at that point?
For that matter, does anyone know if there's an MNG plugin for Mozilla/Firefox? At least then the user would see the plugin-finder right there in the page and could install the plugin to then see the MNG content. (this would probably be better than an extension)
(don't get me wrong -- I'd rather it be built into the browser, but I think at this point a plugin would be my 2nd choice)
...Using JavaScript and PHP, we can generate accessible image-headings using any font we like. And we don’t have to change the structure of our HTML or CSS at all....
zachariah wrote:(In reply to comment #555 and comment #556)
If it (ever) get's built in (but by default is turned off), then wouldn't it be fairly simple to make an extension which turns it on, at that point?
For that matter, does anyone know if there's an MNG plugin for Mozilla/Firefox? At least then the user would see the plugin-finder right there in the page and could install the plugin to then see the MNG content. (this would probably be better than an extension)
(don't get me wrong -- I'd rather it be built into the browser, but I think at this point a plugin would be my 2nd choice)
there is, but the plugin only works for MNGs in a <object> tag, and those in an <IMG> tag still show up broken.
According to comment 584 and 585, the patch doesn't actually build the support in by default. This means that end-users of default builds see no difference. No rise in download size, no rise in install size, no slowdown etc. But it does enable people to build in support if they want to, which cannot be done at the moment. It's then a simple matter to enable building by default, whenever that happens. All it does is increase source code size, which has never been a large concern of anyone's.
I would like a review to be requested on the latest patch to see what happens. I would like to hear the main objection to including this patch.
Last edited by djcater on September 4th, 2005, 9:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Well of course MNG and JNG won't be used if browsers don't support them. If this same argument were applied to all web technologies, browsers would support almost none. Was there any new technology widely used on the web before any popular browser supported it?
Little-known fact: before browsers implemented PNG, the use of PNG files on the web was very low.
The implementation of PNG in browsers happened before PNGs were used on the net.
Implementation of MNG will also have to happen before MNGs will be widely used.
I've wanted to use MNGs on occasion, the whole animations-with-RGBA dealie is attractive, but I've always had to use GIFs or some other workaround since MNGs aren't supported. The result? MNG use is very low.
However, Mozilla browsers don't make up most of the user agents that access the web. Even if Mozilla browsers started implementing MNG support, it would be useless, as 90% won't be able to view them because of a crappy browser.
mozillaZine is an independent Mozilla community and advocacy site. We're not affiliated or endorsed by the Mozilla Corporation but we love them just the same.