Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!sri-unix!hplabs!gatech!gitpyr!robert From: robert@gitpyr.gatech.EDU (Robert Viduya) Newsgroups: comp.graphics Subject: Graphic file formats (was: 3d objects posted...Merry Christmas!) Message-ID: <2824@gitpyr.gatech.EDU> Date: Sun, 21-Dec-86 11:57:40 EST Article-I.D.: gitpyr.2824 Posted: Sun Dec 21 11:57:40 1986 Date-Received: Sun, 21-Dec-86 21:04:00 EST References: <6901@decwrl.DEC.COM> <507@elrond.UUCP> Reply-To: robert@gitpyr.UUCP (Robert Viduya) Organization: Office of Computing Services, Georgia Tech Lines: 57 >amamaral@elrond.UUCP (Alan Amaral) (amamaral@elrond.UUCP, <507@elrond.UUCP>): > In article <6901@decwrl.DEC.COM>, rost@decwrl.DEC.COM (Randi Rost) writes: > > I have created a library of C routines for reading/writing/creating > > Object File Format files... > > I'm not sure about distributing the sources on the network, but if > > there is enough demand, perhaps I can twist some upper-management > > arms to let me do such a thing. > > Please do post the sources if humanly possible. I have been looking for > some reasonable file format that I can use where I stand a snowballs chance > in hell of exchanging info with others easily. There are other file formats floating around that will handle porting graphics from machine to machine. The one I'm most familier with is Commodore's IFF (Interchange File Format) which allows to store not only graphics but other info as well such as sound or even just plain text. The Amiga uses IFF and full documentation as well as a few sample C programs for reading and writing IFF files can be found in the ROM Kernal Reference Manual for the machine. Putting my obvious bias aside (I own an Amiga) and looking at things objectively, I would say that the best thing to go with is the new GKS Metafile format that ANSI and ISO are supposedly working on. I've not been able to find this particular standard in the GaTech library (I'm not sure it's even an accepted standard yet), so I can't really say much about it. However, it does have a few things going for it: o It's a standard developed and supported by an organization devoted to standards. These tend to not change too much as time goes on and when they do, it's almost always guaranteed to be compatible and always has a good reason for the change. o Standards developed by companies tend to have a more difficult time being accepted by other companies, especially those in direct competition to the developing company. Instead, those other companies tend to come up with their own standards (incompatible, of course) leading to a plethora of incompatible standards. As an example of this, look at the various sets of control sequences used for terminal control. It's only been recently that ANSI's X3.64 standard has garnered wide-spread acceptance. Of course, there are drawbacks with things developed by a committee. However, I think those drawbacks are more acceptable than the total anarchy that would ensue if the standard organization didn't exist. robert -- Robert Viduya robert@pyr.ocs.gatech.edu Office of Computing Services (404) 894-4660 Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, Georgia 30332