On 10/11/06, bulia byak <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:
On 10/11/06, Jonathan Shook <jshook@...400...> wrote:
It would be pretty easy for me to do this now, only if I had the option of not collapsing the xml for transforms, and instead could access individual named or numbered transformations which constitute them, in addition to being able to access their high-level parameters, like "rotate by" instead of in affine form.
I.e. you want Inkscape to write "rotate() translate()" etc instead of just "matrix()"?
Well, at least Inkscape can _read_ transforms in any format. So if you use scripts for generating SVG and Inkscape only for rendering, it should work. Or am I missing something?
In other words, my question is: why do you need to _read_ transforms written by Inkscape? For example, if you want to move an object by a given distance, and if this object has matrix() written by Inkscape, you can simply add your own move on top of that, i.e. "matrix() translate()" and it should work.
-- bulia byak Inkscape. Draw Freely. http://www.inkscape.org
I would actually like to author in Inkscape, and render with it, but allow for an intermediate step of transforming specific elements in specific ways with a mostly-ignorant script. If there were a way to call parameterized scripts during the headless rendering mode, It would address this need and then some, I think.