X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f996b,db5e10806433cc77
X-Google-Attributes: gidf996b,public
From: guckes@banach.math.fu-berlin.de (Sven Guckes)
Subject: Re: ASCII vs GIF
Date: 1997/02/11
Message-ID: <slrn5g0c95.gk0.guckes@banach.math.fu-berlin.de>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 218009332
x-old-subject: Re: Posting ascii art on the web
references: <19970207050200.AAA10527@ladder01.news.aol.com>
 <32FB5C05.41C67EA6@sm.luth.se>
 <slrn5fpgjc.662.guckes@euler.math.fu-berlin.de> <32FF38EF.27EE@sm.luth.se>
 <slrn5fun79.g7q.guckes@banach.math.fu-berlin.de> <32FF66F7.1DD0@online.no>
x-newsreader-info: http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/slrn/
organization: Freie Universitaet Berlin
x-access: 16 17 19
reply-to: guckes@math.fu-berlin.de
newsgroups: alt.ascii-art


ekveland@online.no (Erik Kambestad Veland):
> Ascii art has the sole purpose of beeing small,
> not memory requiring, flexible and beautiful.

*ehem*  Same holds for GIFs.  ;-)

> It also has the ability to be implemented in email unlike gifs.
> So gifs could be used to what it should be for: pixel images. [...]
> There are still a whole great deal of people with text based
> terminals and browsers, and why should we let them out?

Well, that's what defines ASCII Art - viewable on a non-graphic terminal.
But the appearance of ASCII characters depend on the used font and size.
The appearance of GIFs should not depend on the viewer, but it requires
a graphical terminal to show them.  Both can be sent via email, though.

> Imagine me converting my whole collection
> to gif, would it then be useful? Hardly!

It would still be useful for some purpose.
Whether you have found it or not.  ;-)

Sven