• Tanoh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Historically, non-animated .gif had some uses. For example small border insets in webpages, when the limited (or non-existant) CSS wasn’t enough.

    JPEG is awful at straight corners and lines, basically anything that isn’t a photo. PNG didn’t exist back then.

    • TheEmpireStrikesDak@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      When you say historically, how far back are we going? I learnt html in 1999/2000 and was experimenting with the different save options in windows photo editor(?) on windows 98 or NT and that’s where I learnt about png and that it works on websites. I don’t think anyone else I knew at the time heard of anything besides jpg and gif for website images back then. But it did work and I used it on my Line Wars fansite on tripod.

      • Tanoh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        PNG took forever to reach baseline usability. Obviously because of IE. I don’t remember exactly, but if you targeted IE you couldn’t use a lot of CSS features and PNG support was shaky at best. I think transparency in PNG just didn’t work.

        • TheEmpireStrikesDak@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          We only had internet explorer in school. I think I didn’t even switch to old school Mozilla at home until after I finished sixth form in 2002, or maybe towards the end of my school days. PNG with transparency definitely worked on IE when I was making fansites on tripod or I wouldn’t have used it. I have a feeling I don’t have my old Line Wars site files anymore, but I’ll check next time I’m on the PC. I might have left them on floppy disks.