Well, I agree and don't agree. :)
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote
However right now importing is mostly for adding any kind of files to the currently opened document, and hence that would be messing up two use different cases.
Good. So, if this is the criterion (on which I could agree, but it's not important), why not applying it to 'export' and 'save as...' too?
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote
Apps that mix various content and have concepts like layers or tracks [...] are project-based (just like Inkscape, really), and hence none of them saves back to original files. They export or render.
Actually I can't see Inkscape being project-based. I feel it being more document-based. And project-based programs only open 'projects' or 'import' contents while Inkscape can open many different 'document' formats converting them into Inkscape 'documents' (not 'projects' using them). Would you define saving a PDF a 'rendering'? Or would you define a BMP a 'project' to 'render' a JPG?
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote
Even though we tend to forget, Inkscape is an _SVG_ editor. That's its definition.
I agree. And, to me, an SVG file is a document, not a project.
I understand that an SVG file can be used in a workflow as a 'project' for producing a different outputs (e.g. a PNG file). But it's not the only workflow nor the main one (Inkscape is an SVG editor, no? So SVG in -> SVG out). Think about opening a PDF, slightly modifying it and saving back to PDF. In this case you don't need a project nor import/export. Inkscape _behaves_ as a PDF editor (also if it's not) and I feel this is a good thing. Why take it away? I think that many Inkscape users take advantage of it. I do.
P.S.: thanks for your reply. I don't want to push this too far too, just give some points to people to think about.
-- View this message in context: http://inkscape.13.n6.nabble.com/Your-opinion-about-Save-as-expor-tp4966175p... Sent from the Inkscape - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.