My apologies, but I'm really, truly tired of the good points in my case being ignored.
I'm ill of being told I'm doing it wrong, that I'm being lazy ("lazy convenience"), and I do think that it hurts Inkscape as a graphics tool to reject this format because many people in the project don't use Inkscape for producing e-commerce web graphics, which consists of most of the content on the internet.
There is less snark in there than you are reading. I do actually think of using other tools for jobs Inkscape is currently the best tool for because of issues like these. They are problems entirely of our own making. It wouldn't bother me so much if I didn't care about Inkscape, and the future of the project.
We need to get over the urge to impose our standards of quality on users that deal with quantity and size restrictions of other systems that png purists don't have to deal with. If we call them lazy, uninformed, wrong... expect snark, and expect them to go elsewhere for their graphics needs.
1. Export png > open another program > convert to jpeg > close other program, erase png 2. Export jpg
Imposing workflow 1, when you can give workflow 2 is user-abuse for any professional graphics program.
Show the advantages of using png, suggest png, but when the user needs jpeg, Inkscape should serve the needs of the user, not the other way around. Please stop saying it's useless, or wrong or lazy. It's none of those things, and there is no alternative to jpeg for size and compression for web at the moment.
-C
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 2:04 AM, Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:16:45PM +0000, C R wrote:
Regarding jpeg output specifically, this has been considered multiple times in the past, but the consensus folks generally came to was that it should be outside the scope for Inkscape.
Why should it be? What other professional drawing program artificially restricts export to standard jpeg format as "out of project scope"?
It's not a good format for the type of graphics Inkscape produces, and while there are sites and services that take only JPG files, it seems kind of a lazy convenience -
Yes, why make exporting to JPG easy for our users? Why should making graphics export in the preferred format with Inkscape easy... you'd think we were making some sort of professional drawing program here, or something.
there's plenty of good tools out there for converting PNGs to JPGs; if it's inconvenient to have to do that, and makes people wonder if they're doing something wrong, well that's not necessarily a bad thing... ;-)
This much is true. Every time I have to open gimp, or a command terminal to convert an inkscape .png to .jpg I do wonder if Inkscape is the right drawing program for the task. I wonder if I shouldn't be making my templates in Kirta. I wonder that *every single time*. I'll bet others do too. Is that really what we want? To drive people to other software?
-C
Not to interrupt your snarky rant there but you ought to have read the remainder of my email where I provided a path forward on this. You started off well in the other email and are making good points, stick with it - don't just drown your good case in sarcasm.
That said, I don't think fundamentally or technically it would be impossible to include jpeg support*. From what I've read, developers would be open to it, but would want to see more compelling reasons than have been seen. Perhaps this would be a good topic to solicit further user input on.
Bryce
- -- if anyone does get a motivation to work on this, I'd strongly
encourage doing it in a branch so we can ensure the functionality is fully baked before it appears in trunk.
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel