- Inkscape Devel - Inkscape Mailman

feImage filter
by Felipe Sanches 24 Jul '07

24 Jul '07

I have been working on feDisplacementMap but I havent figured out a way to test my first drafts of code since the displacementmap test on the SVG 1,1 full test suite also depends on feImage. That sucks! So, I stopped working on fedisplacementmap and started to implement feImage. The specs say that feImage should behave similarly to the image element. So, I imagine that it may be possible to not duplicate code. But I tryied to look at sp-image.cppand I dont know exactly how to reuse it. Could anybody help on this? Juca

2 1

Fonts
by Thomas Worthington 24 Jul '07

24 Jul '07

Hi, Is anyone actually working on fixing the font problems (ie, no styles except the very basic ones)? This is a total show-stopper for professional use. If no one is working on it, is there a guide to how to start on working with the Inkscape code, submitting patches etcetera? I'm not sure that I'll have much time to work on it but I am a programmer and I have worked with Linux fonts quite a lot over the years. I really like Inkscape and use it for design work (real, paid design work) quite a lot but it always hits a wall when a client is already using use a font which Inkscape can't handle but has to be incorporated, like Helvetica Black, which happened yesterday. There is almost nothing else which causes me to have to revert to Illustrator now other than font handling and I'm starting to really resent Illustrator because of it. Thomas Worthington

8 17

Skeletal Strokes (InkscapeLPE)
by unknown＠example.com 24 Jul '07

24 Jul '07

Hello all, Progress report of my GSoC: Skeletal strokes seems to work! (many thanks to the 2geom people!) See a screenshot here: http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/images/Lpe-skeletal.png and the wiki page here: http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/LivePathEffects I'd very much like people to test LivePathEffect things and report bugs on the wiki. Although one must know that the skeletal strokes effect is still under heavy development. Because I very much like my own branch and I'd like to keep it a little while longer, you need to checkout the live-path-effects branch to see this in action and test stuff, sorry! Cheers! Johan

3 4

feTurbulence - copyright status?
by Felipe Sanches 23 Jul '07

23 Jul '07

Reading the SVG specs, I see that there is a big chunk of C code in the feTurbulence filter effect spec. What is the copyright status of this piece of code? Is it public domain? After all, it is inside the specs, would them sue us if we copy&paste it? If we can use it let me know the conditions so that I can try to implement this filter more easily. the code is here: http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/filters.html#feTurbulence Juca

3 3

Re: [Inkscape-devel] Inkscape-devel Digest, Vol 14, Issue 43
by Joshua Facemyer / Impressus Art 23 Jul '07

23 Jul '07

> > > This list, like the Blur slider below it, must > > > search the selected object's filter stack for feBlend or feComposite, > > > display the current mode of that filter and let me change it (or add a > > > new filter to the top of the stack, but only if no such filter already > > > exists in the selected object's stack). > > That would interact very badly with many interesting filters, as they > > may be built out of multiple feBlend/feGaussianBlur elements; simply > > picking the first or last feBlend element (or even all of them, > > depending on how the filter is designed) won't give desirable results. > OK, that was just one of my ideas, I don't insist on making it that > way too much. It may indeed be confusing sometimes, although also > useful IMHO. What do others think? I agree that the user should be in control of exactly which instance of a filter he is editing - he might have a blurred object that is then composited which he wants to again blur after the composite. There is no way you can code the dialog to determine what instance of the filter he intends to adjust. I'm not familiar with the current implementation, so please pardon my ignorance. However, I think it is necessary to have a list of filters on a pane of the dialog (much like the layers dialog) in order of implementation for the object/group which can easily be chosen for editing. They could then be named (?) and kept track of that way if so desired. It's a familiar method already, and seems to me the most intuitive way to control the filters. Of course, then you might even have some sort of indication (maybe an icon) of what filters are affecting the object, but which are applied to a different subset of objects (group), which could then be chosen and edited. It might be fairly complex, but something like this: choose the filter, a dialog asks if you want to switch the selection to the group affected by the filter (if it's different from the current selection). Make sense? It does to me, but I'm the one thinking it...

1 0

Re: [Inkscape-devel] Inkscape-devel Digest, Vol 14, Issue 39
by Christopher Brown 21 Jul '07

21 Jul '07

> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:58:00 +0200 > From: David Christian Berg <david@...407...> > Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Changed bitmap handling > > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 12:30 -0400, bulia byak wrote: > > On 7/19/07, David Christian Berg <david@...407...> wrote: > > > Ok, sorry to disagree, but the always embed option is only good for > > > home-use, not for professional use. > > > > Not at all. Some professionals may sometimes want their images not > > embedded, but far from always. > > Ok, maybe the "only" was exaggerated and should be a "mainly", but still > my point is valid :) > > > Even with some bitmap capabilities > > > integrated in Inkscape people will continue to want to use GIMP or > > > Photoshop to do sophisticated adjustments. Extracting and re-embedding > > > is a little cumbersome. > > > > OK, I think we can make this behavior settable in prefs, but with the > > default being to embed. > > Actually I think it should just be a checkbox "embed" in the import > dialog that is checked by default. (I'll have to figure about dragging > files into the document still) > > > > Or think of one image being used on a poster, a booklet and within some > > > entrance ticket or the such. It's great to only have to change it at one > > > place! > > > > You're comparing some inconvenience (having to extract or change > > prefs) with a nasty surprise and frustration that may be caused when > > you e.g. crop the image for the poster and then discover that it got > > cropped in the booklet as well. The latter is much worse than the > > former, and is simply unacceptable as default behavior. > > Why would you crop an image? You do that in Inkscape with the clip > option :-D > > > > I don't see a strong need for an image lying directly in an > > > automatically created folder next to the SVG... these can almost just as > > > well be embedded. However externally linked image are a must imho. > > > > Sure, we need this option, but off by default. > > Off by default, meaning, unless the user changes a setting, it will always embed images? For my purposes, i.e. permanent effects on bitmaps, I think I should keep the format that the image is already in. If the user wants to embed an image, he can do so easily with the python extension. > > > As for the editing problem: I believe that editing an image would be > > > introduced by double-clicking the image. When the linked image has no > > > write access, a message should show up: > > > Right now I'm using the Extensions menu. What is the advantage to double-clicking, and how do you picture the interface? > > > "The image cannot be edited because you do not have writing access to > > > the linked file. Would you like to embed the image in the the document > > > to continue editing?" > > > > Yes, but only if the setting is changed to not embed. By default, it > > just gets silently embedded and no warning is needed. > > I disagree! If in a document there is a non-embedded image, this warning > should always appear! By default no images will be linked so therefore > the dialogue will not appear. Acutally a similar dialogue should be > shown for _all_ embedded image, as a warning that this changes the > original image. As far as writing over the original image, I would never do that. For image.jpeg, right now I'm creating a copied image at image_orig.jpg, unless image_orig.jpg is taken, at which point I ask the user for somewhere to save the new image, unless the image_orig.jpg which already exists is equivalent to image.jpeg. Back when I used Windows, that was how Picasa handled the issue, and I thought it would work for me too. (Also, I ask the user for a new location if image_orig.jpg and/or image.jpeg are unwriteable.) > > Anyways, we basically agree on the topic. > > Cheers! > > David > These are mostly little things, but I'm curious about your idea of double-clicking of images to edit them. -Christopher

2 1

Re: [Inkscape-devel] Bitmap handling (GSoC)
by Christopher Brown 21 Jul '07

21 Jul '07

On 7/18/07, Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 10:33:00AM -0700, Ted Gould wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > As you guys are aware Chris is working on putting some bitmap editing > > tools into Inkscape for is GSoC project. There's a couple things that > > are difficult on the user interaction front that I wanted to bring up > > and see what people think. > > > > Basically, there are two types of images: embedded and linked. There is > > two types of linked images that are read-only and ones that we can > > write. So what should happen when someone does a bitmap operation on > > these types of image? How should undo/redo be handled? > > > > I'm leaning towards saying "always embed" at this point. It's simpler > > and probably does something similar to what most people want anyway. We > > don't need file dialogs or temporary files. What does everyone think > > about this? Chris, did I state the problem correctly? > > Hi Chris, > > Can you tell us more about your plans with this feature, and how > embedding vs. linked will make things more challenging or less? > Sounds like most people prefer embedded - does this lead us into any > issues on your end we should know about? > > Bryce > > Embedding all images would certainly make it much simpler and easier. I don't know about speed issues -- but intuition tells me that having a 10 mb file would load more slowly than a 100 kb svg file and five 2 mb images. But that's a matter for someone who's put more time into Inkscape's rendering functions to answer. If I inserted an image and executed some special effect on it, and then found out my program had converted my image into base64 and embedded it into my svg document, without asking me, I wouldn't be too I happy, personally. I don't want to make that the only option, and I'd actually rather not have it default. My next goal is to be able to undo operations on linked images. If that isn't extraordinarily hard (and I don't expect it to be, I just have to get into the undo buffer, I guess), I don't see any reason why keeping images linked would be a bad idea. -Christopher

2 1

Convolve Matrix filter implemented
by Felipe Sanches 20 Jul '07

20 Jul '07

I have implemented the convolve matrix filter The patch and the 2 new files have been posted to the patch tracker: /src/display/nr-filter-convolve-matrix.cpp /src/display/nr-filter-convolve-matrix.h See http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1757228&group_id=9… The implementation isn't complete yet, but the basic is already working. For example, you can see that now inkscape renders correctly the 4th test in the SVG1.1 test suite. A screenshot is available at http://bighead.poli.usp.br/~juca/code/inkscape/inkscape-SVG1.1-testsuite-co… I am wondering what is causing the spurious horizontal or vertical lines when we scroll the screen. Any clue on that? Felipe "Juca" Sanches

3 3

latex+pstricks export: bug and requests of dev
by Joce Etienne 20 Jul '07

20 Jul '07

Hello, This export possibility is brilliant. I think there's a bug in the handling of stroke colour (or width) for paths: saving as latex+pstricks a path with no stroke (but a fill colour) gives a path with a stroke in the tex file. Also, there's no dialog offering *not to* save text as curves, as is the case with the postscript export. This is a pity, since one could then include latex commands in the text (as is possible with xfig). One could always explicitely convert (some of) the text to paths in order to prevent it from being interpreted by latex. As well, keeping track of the labels in the saved tex file would help. They could even be included as PStricks "nodes", so additional pstricks commands could be added in the latex document (such as an arrow between an element of the drawing and an element of the latex document it's included in). Anyway, thanks a lot for this brilliant tool! I'm using Inkscape as well for fun as for work (scientific sketches), and it's great. Jocelyn Sorry if some of the above has already been reported, mailman archives utility is out of order as I write. Inkscape 0.45.1 (Build 18 July 2007) -- Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kanns mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger

2 1

Resizable 3D boxes
by Maximilian Albert 20 Jul '07

20 Jul '07

Hi everyone! Good news! 3D box coding finally has had a new visible effect: Boxes are now resizable 'in perspective'. The current version by default provides three handles for each box, two on the front face (which we consider lying in XY plane) and one on the rear face (for the Z direcion). (As a sidenote, observe that the labelling of the Y and Z axis has been changed compared to the last version.) The first two handles can be used to arbitrarily resize the box inside the XY-plane, the third one obviously resizes it in the direction of the Z axis. When Shift is being pressed, the movement temporarily becomes constrained to a single axis for the first two handles and switches to occuring inside the XY plane for the third handle. (Try it, this is more intuitive than it sounds.) However, this is only one of many possible scenarios. As an alternative, I have implemented a second variant where the box has four handles and all but the circle-shaped one (which acts as a kind of 'master handle') use constrained dragging by default. It is possible to switch between these two variants using the corresponding toggle buttons in the 3D box toolbar showing three/four knots, respectively. These buttons are for convenience only and will disappear once the definitive behaviour is settled. I would very much appreciate your feedback what kind of behaviour you consider most intuitive. This could certainly also be a mixture of the two, or there could be a different number of handles, or they could be at different corners, or ... Tell me what you think is most natural. (It probably depends on the perspective, too; try toggling the states of the vanishing points from infinite to finite using the corresponding buttons and see whether this makes a difference). BTW, the 3D box tool now has the shortcuts Shift-F4 and X so that it's not necessary to manually change line #143 in widgets/toolbox.cpp to unhide the toolbox icon. In case you are wondering why this new feature has taken so long since my last email: I have constantly been refactoring the code under the hood because it was extremely cumbersome at that time, making expansion and implementation of new features rather difficult. But I believe that the current internal representation is sufficiently elegant and generic so that further development should be much quicker (and with a lot more visible effects anyway). Next I am going to attack the style issues Bulia mentioned in one of his last emails (sorry that this has lied idle in the meantime). Alternatively, I could implement draggable vanishing points first. Bulia, what do you think is more important? Thanks for all your feedback and best regards, Max ==== P.S.: While I am at it I'd also like to pose a few questions regarding small bugs that can possibly spare me a good deal of scouring the code. Maybe someone has a quick hint where to look. 1) After resizing the box, undo (Ctrl-Z) correctly undoes the change of size but the corresponding handle remains at the altered position. How can I make the handle undo-aware, too? 2) Toggling the state of a vanishing point is not undo-able either. How can I change that? Do I need to register the corresponding action somewhere? 3) With the 3D box tool active, clicking on an already created but currently unselected box only selects a single face instead of the whole box. I suspect this is related to the fact that the box is implemented as a group of paths (which represent the separate faces). How can I pass the click on to the parent box? Can this be done by tagging the paths as objects of sodipodi:type="inkscape:3dboxface" (which I would have to do for the style stuff anyway) and catching the select action? Thanks!

7 28