<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Better animations in Firefox 3</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/</link>
	<description>Just another mozillalabs.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:12:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrianZ</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-10804</link>
		<dc:creator>BrianZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-10804</guid>
		<description>Is there any way to make smaller files?  A 3000x200 Firefox Persona image with only 3 layers needs to be less than 300K, but mine comes out at 1.8mb using the APNG editor.  Actually, only a very small area changes in my animation, but I guess you must use the entire background area for each layer? </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is there any way to make smaller files?  A 3000&#215;200 Firefox Persona image with only 3 layers needs to be less than 300K, but mine comes out at 1.8mb using the APNG editor.  Actually, only a very small area changes in my animation, but I guess you must use the entire background area for each layer?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FF gold</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-422</link>
		<dc:creator>FF gold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:58:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-422</guid>
		<description>FF Garbage: youre stupid. If you don&#039;t like FF, don&#039;t use it.

For me, FF is the best web browser.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FF Garbage: youre stupid. If you don&#8217;t like FF, don&#8217;t use it.</p>
<p>For me, FF is the best web browser.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FF Garbage</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-423</link>
		<dc:creator>FF Garbage</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:01:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-423</guid>
		<description>Who gives a crap about animations!!! I would like a browser that doesn&#039;t eat all my ram and take 4 hours to start. What is with devs today? In Devs mind, &quot;should I add pretty colors, or should make this run better&quot; HMMMMM I think Ill add colors instead of making my software work well. Geshhh</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who gives a crap about animations!!! I would like a browser that doesn&#8217;t eat all my ram and take 4 hours to start. What is with devs today? In Devs mind, &#8220;should I add pretty colors, or should make this run better&#8221; HMMMMM I think Ill add colors instead of making my software work well. Geshhh</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hawaii</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-425</link>
		<dc:creator>Hawaii</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:33:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-425</guid>
		<description>I see these formats coming and going, and unless one of the large companies adopts it and begins growing it more, I don&#039;t see much of a future.  The idea and set up are great, don&#039;t get me wrong.  I just think these things need major support.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see these formats coming and going, and unless one of the large companies adopts it and begins growing it more, I don&#8217;t see much of a future.  The idea and set up are great, don&#8217;t get me wrong.  I just think these things need major support.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lindsay</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-424</link>
		<dc:creator>Lindsay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:31:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-424</guid>
		<description>We&#039;re thinking about using APNG for broadcast slide shows on digital radio - would really bring the ads to life... we will need editing tools to create the files and this is looking good... and open formats are really powerful for getting new ideas manufactured.  Keep up the development!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re thinking about using APNG for broadcast slide shows on digital radio &#8211; would really bring the ads to life&#8230; we will need editing tools to create the files and this is looking good&#8230; and open formats are really powerful for getting new ideas manufactured.  Keep up the development!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: /\/\arcio</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-417</link>
		<dc:creator>/\/\arcio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:13:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-417</guid>
		<description>Great work. Super interested in the SVG extensions feed. An approach where an external SVG editor talks with yours.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great work. Super interested in the SVG extensions feed. An approach where an external SVG editor talks with yours.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Dolske</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-421</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Dolske</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:30:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-421</guid>
		<description>John: PNG is an open format that can be extended by anyone. It&#039;s unfortunate that the PNG group chose not to make APNG an official extension, but that doesn&#039;t make it wrong to use.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John: PNG is an open format that can be extended by anyone. It&#8217;s unfortunate that the PNG group chose not to make APNG an official extension, but that doesn&#8217;t make it wrong to use.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-420</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 10:41:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-420</guid>
		<description>I loved the idea!!! Really... but since it was &quot;rejected as an official extension&quot;, doesn&#039;t that makes the format &quot;unauthorized&quot; to be published?

in other words: doesn&#039;t that makes it impossible to be used?


and also (since I&#039;m a web developer and  i do believe in W3C standards) this makes it impossible for the extension ever be recommended as a Standard from W3C, right?

Anyway... You have my full support! I do love the .apng idea!

Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I loved the idea!!! Really&#8230; but since it was &#8220;rejected as an official extension&#8221;, doesn&#8217;t that makes the format &#8220;unauthorized&#8221; to be published?</p>
<p>in other words: doesn&#8217;t that makes it impossible to be used?</p>
<p>and also (since I&#8217;m a web developer and  i do believe in W3C standards) this makes it impossible for the extension ever be recommended as a Standard from W3C, right?</p>
<p>Anyway&#8230; You have my full support! I do love the .apng idea!</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous Guy</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-419</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous Guy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:33:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-419</guid>
		<description>Is APNG actually superior to MNG in any aspect other than falling back to looking like a plain PNG in older browsers?

MNG had many shortcomings, don&#039;t get me wrong; I&#039;m just wondering how APNG compares. Honestly the lowest point of MNG was its very low-tech toolchain, and until APNG sees broad adoption (by at least one major vendor like, say, Adobe uses it) this will be a sticking point for the APNG format as well. The next lowest point was that the file sizes weren&#039;t all that small because it was lossless (unless you reduced color depth or something); does APNG give better file sizes?

This spam filter is annoying, take 3 here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is APNG actually superior to MNG in any aspect other than falling back to looking like a plain PNG in older browsers?</p>
<p>MNG had many shortcomings, don&#8217;t get me wrong; I&#8217;m just wondering how APNG compares. Honestly the lowest point of MNG was its very low-tech toolchain, and until APNG sees broad adoption (by at least one major vendor like, say, Adobe uses it) this will be a sticking point for the APNG format as well. The next lowest point was that the file sizes weren&#8217;t all that small because it was lossless (unless you reduced color depth or something); does APNG give better file sizes?</p>
<p>This spam filter is annoying, take 3 here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tapeten</title>
		<link>http://mozillalabs.com/blog/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/comment-page-1/#comment-418</link>
		<dc:creator>Tapeten</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:42:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mozillalabs.com/2007/08/better-animations-in-firefox-3/#comment-418</guid>
		<description>I am really times strained on the new version Firefox 3,0. We wait simply times starting from which there so still come at renewals.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am really times strained on the new version Firefox 3,0. We wait simply times starting from which there so still come at renewals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

