Hi Pelle,
Oh I'm really glad to hear from you because I haven't heard fromusers who primarily need the physical measurements of the output to be accurate.
I goofed and sent out the wrong URL in the part of the thread you replied to, so I'm wondering if you saw this version?
http://i.imgur.com/YF7MCWl.png
I think your users would want to choose the physical option, then the accurate option. With the updated mockup, is this a more obvious choice?
On 01/26/2017 03:54 AM, Pelle Nilsson wrote:
I am pretty sure that the correct option for us will be "intended for physical output" and hopefully everyone will figure that out. Although it might distract many to see the strong bold text saying "choose if unsure", coupled with that option being the default. Kind of inviting to click the "wrong" one? But then I am confused about the two sub-options. Why are they needed? It sounds as if scaling individual elements is the correct choice always.
Nope. The extended info sort of goes into the tradeoffs, scaling individual elements is a lot more bug prone, especially if you have say blur filters, clipped objects, masked objects, etc. because their positions relative to each other may not be correct after scaling. If appearance is more important to you, scaling the entire document in one go is going to result in a more consistent appearance to how the file looked in older inkscapes.
Scaling individual elements preserves the real world sizes / scale of things, but may mess up the appearance a little bit. It's also a little bit less stable of a thing to do, so it may be buggy and not work correctly. This is why the screen is designed to make it the most deliberate option.
Digital art in pixel measurements doesn't get scaled at all, so their artwork at 96 dpi will smaller than it was at 90 dpi, but they likely dont care and that is the safest safest thing to do as it doesn't tweak any elements at all.
Does this make more sense?
~m