# Re: SANE_FRAME Formats (was Re: xsane-0.31 available)

Stephen Williams (steve@icarus.com)
Tue, 03 Aug 1999 16:58:05 -0700

- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
- Next message: Nick Lamb: "Re: RGBI (was Re: xsane-0.31 available)"
- Previous message: Oliver Rauch: "Re: SANE_FRAME Formats (was Re: xsane-0.31 available)"

oliver.rauch@Wolfsburg.DE said:
> Does the backend need to know what a frontend can handle?

No, it just needs to know what format the frontend wants the next
image to be in. If the frontend can't handle JFIF, it won't ask for it.
Sound sane (er, sensible)?

oliver.rauch@Wolfsburg.DE said:
> I don`t know if we really need "must have" frame formats. If there is
> a frontend that only can handle JPEG-frames, where is the problem?

The "must have" would apply to the scanner driver, I think. An application
that uses one of the "must have" formats should be able to operate any
SANE driver, albeit not necessarily optimally. If the application is not
happy with any of the "must have" formats, then that application is
taking the chance of not being able to connect to certain scanners.

If GIMP uses "must have" formats, then it can read an image from *any*
scanner, or the driver for that scanner is broken. If GIMP insists on
some optional format, then that is its own problem.

    --
    Steve Williams                "The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
    steve@icarus.com              But I have promises to keep,
    steve@picturel.com            and lines to code before I sleep,
    http://www.picturel.com       And lines to code before I sleep."

    --
    Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/
    To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com

     Next message: Nick Lamb: "Re: RGBI (was Re: xsane-0.31 available)"
     Previous message: Oliver Rauch: "Re: SANE_FRAME Formats (was Re: xsane-0.31 available)"