URIs identify and URLs locate; however, locators are also identifiers, so every URL is also a URI, but there are URIs which are not URLs.
Examples
This is my name, which is an identifier.
It is like a URI, but cannot be a URL, as it tells you nothing about my location or how to contact me.
In this case it also happens to identify at least 5 other people in the USA alone.
- 4914 West Bay Street, Nassau, Bahamas
This is a locator, which is an identifier for that physical location.
It is like both a URL and URI (since all URLs are URIs), and also identifies me indirectly as "resident of..".
In this case it uniquely identifies me, but that would change if I get a roommate.
I say "like" because these examples do not follow the required syntax.
Popular confusion
From Wikipedia:
In computing, a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) is a subset of the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) that specifies where an identified resource is available and the mechanism for retrieving it. In popular usage and in many technical documents and verbal discussions it is often incorrectly used as a synonym for URI, ... [emphasis mine]
Because of this common confusion, many products and documentation incorrectly use one term instead of the other, assign their own distinction, or use them synonymously.
URNs
My name, Roger Pate, could be like a URN (Uniform Resource Name), except those are much more regulated and intended to be unique across both space and time.
Because I currently share this name with other people, it's not globally unique and would not be appropriate as a URN. However, even if no other family used this name, I'm named after my paternal grandfather, so it still wouldn't be unique across time. And even if that wasn't the case, the possibility of naming my descendants after me make this unsuitable as a URN.
URNs are different from URLs in this rigid uniqueness constraint, even though they both share the syntax of URIs.
To fix the OutOfMemory error, you should do something like this:
BitmapFactory.Options options = new BitmapFactory.Options();
options.inSampleSize = 8;
Bitmap preview_bitmap = BitmapFactory.decodeStream(is, null, options);
This inSampleSize
option reduces memory consumption.
Here's a complete method. First it reads image size without decoding the content itself. Then it finds the best inSampleSize
value, it should be a power of 2, and finally the image is decoded.
// Decodes image and scales it to reduce memory consumption
private Bitmap decodeFile(File f) {
try {
// Decode image size
BitmapFactory.Options o = new BitmapFactory.Options();
o.inJustDecodeBounds = true;
BitmapFactory.decodeStream(new FileInputStream(f), null, o);
// The new size we want to scale to
final int REQUIRED_SIZE=70;
// Find the correct scale value. It should be the power of 2.
int scale = 1;
while(o.outWidth / scale / 2 >= REQUIRED_SIZE &&
o.outHeight / scale / 2 >= REQUIRED_SIZE) {
scale *= 2;
}
// Decode with inSampleSize
BitmapFactory.Options o2 = new BitmapFactory.Options();
o2.inSampleSize = scale;
return BitmapFactory.decodeStream(new FileInputStream(f), null, o2);
} catch (FileNotFoundException e) {}
return null;
}
Best Answer
Here's the correct way of doing it:
If you need to load very large images, the following code will load it in in tiles (avoiding large memory allocations):
See the answer here