On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 09:41:03AM -0400, MenTaLguY wrote:
On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 21:46 -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
[SVG Tiny support] I don't think it's sufficient for Inkscape 1.
Why's that?
Aside from my opinion and bulia's, read our reviews in the press. The universal expectation out there for a 1.0 release includes a lot more feature and UI work.
Actually for the purposes of deciding what goes into Inkscape 1.00, I would not put any weight at all into what the press thinks. They aren't putting their blood/sweat/tears into doing the work.
The opinion of you and Bulia is what matters here. You two have put in huge amounts of energy into the project so what you think should go into 1.00 counts for a lot.
Just to pick one example: I wouldn't dare release a 1.0 without a proper layers dialog.
*Nod* Judging from the number of RFE/Bug reports we've gotten related to this, it's clear that this is an extremely needed feature. This will be a great feature to get implemented.
From what I have seen of the SVG Tiny spec, it is not something that is
going to get implemented overnight. It requires a number of features that either aren't implemented or are being worked on but won't be implemented in the near term. I assume there is going to be _plenty_ of time to get a lot of other needed features (like the layer dialog) implemented. However, it sounds like there is clearly a list of features _in addition_ to SVG Tiny support, that the Inkscape development community would expect to be implemented prior to a 1.00 release.
It sounds like the question then becomes, "In addition to SVG Tiny compliance, what other features MUST be implemented prior to a 1.00 release?"
Perhaps it would be wisest to assemble a list of what we expect, and then aggressively triage the list so we can get 1.00 out without getting bogged down in unnecessary details too much.
Bryce