wooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
(,
Wed 3 Mar 2004, 18:07,
archived)
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
oooooooo
puntastic.
but how did you get a bmp that small?
and why does it look like it's saved as a jpg?
(,
Wed 3 Mar 2004, 18:08,
archived)
but how did you get a bmp that small?
and why does it look like it's saved as a jpg?
but has a BMP file extention. IE is probably smart enough to sigure out it's a JPG.
(,
Wed 3 Mar 2004, 18:10,
archived)
IE in fact is too stupid to figure out that the suffix and the compression don't match and so continues to reffer to it as a bmp
opera/firebird should both call it a jpg
(,
Wed 3 Mar 2004, 18:14,
archived)
opera/firebird should both call it a jpg

