Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!psueea!jove.cs.pdx.edu!bartonr
From: bartonr@jove.cs.pdx.edu (Robert Barton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: HAM-E
Message-ID: <2194@psueea.UUCP>
Date: 9 Jan 90 10:42:57 GMT
Sender: news@psueea.UUCP
Reply-To: bartonr@jove.cs.pdx.edu (Robert Barton)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Portland State University; Portland OR
Lines: 12


 tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (HIM) writes:
>I am more inpressed with the elegance of the solution the more I reflect on it.

> In addition , th info in the article is sufficienbt that I have already
> begun an output converter for 24bit Progressive Peripherials Framegrabber
> files to the new IFF format.

  I didn't see any mention of a new IFF format.  They claimed that it was
IFF-compatible; presumably they actually meant to say ILBM-compatible.  From
the description given however this is not the case.  Using parts of the BODY
chunk for purposes other than bit-plane data makes it incompatible.