Talk:DjVu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Computing (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Open format?[edit]

With patents? It might be a good idea to mention that in case anyone reading this article is thinking of adopting the format. For a user it makes little difference since they can just use the free viewers (even Irfanview can show them), but for people wanting to write encoder/decoder support into their own (commercial) software this is a very big deal. This effectively makes it no more or less open a format than PDF or Postscript. 71.196.246.113 (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

What patents? DjVu is generally considered an open format and has very good free software tools for producing it, although not as good as some commercial ones by the original producers. I've not investigated but I've always thought this was just about software source and licenses rather than patents? It would be very nice if you could add more references. Thanks, Nemo 18:05, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
http://djvu.org/forum/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=727 5900953, 6058214, 6188334, 6281817, 6343154, 6476740, 6587588, 6728411, 6901169 (USA) This is just from the 3rd link on 'djvu' and 'patents' using Google. In case that page disappears, I put the list of numbers here.
http://djvu.sourceforge.net/licensing.html More info. 71.196.246.113 (talk) 08:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

broken link[edit]

The second external link at the bottom of the page is broken. Maybe it should be http://djvulibre.sourceforge.net/ but I am not sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:6B0:E:2018:0:0:0:207 (talk) 15:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Works fine - it was just down for a while I guess. Next time try a "is it down" or "downforeveryoneorjustme" website. They generally tell roughly the last time the site was reachable. 71.196.246.113 (talk) 08:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Misleading statement on PDF[edit]

The second paragraph in the history section suggests that djvu is a superior format to PDF because it is an open file format probably because in the referenced audio file Brewster Kahle states that PDF is a proprietary format. But this is incorrect. As PDF is a published specification (ISO32000) maintained by a standards organization it is also an open file format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.2.24.218 (talk) 12:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Also, are the statements regarding DjVu being more compact than PDF still accurate? When DjVu was first developed, PDF did not support JBIG2 or JPEG 2000, but both are in PDF versions ≥ 1.5, released in 2003. Since the tools to manipulate DjVu have stagnated, it might be worth revisiting the widespread use of DjVu instead of ISO 32000 files. --scruss (talk) 00:38, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Djvu vs. DjVu?[edit]

This article uses both at the moment, but I believe that DjVu is correct. Dmoerner (talk) 09:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on DjVu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:25, 11 September 2017 (UTC)