On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:31 AM, Martin Owens wrote:
OK there is an obvious set of problems that you can't currently solve in SVG 1.1, and the extensions in SVG 1.2 only go so far.
But Inkscape needs at authoritative master source format. You can't go round creating images that others can't edit, it's just not good enough.
Using SVG is a very good way of allowing re-editing.
Martin, with all respect due you seem to be missing the point that conical/spiral gradient fills *are* re-editable in Inkscape. Why don't you just apply the patch and try it yourself? :)
But having editable elements that are none vector based is a maddening situation. What am I to do if I want to make something to print on the moon? Do I have to save a special 4 billion pixels per inch version?
A word comes to mind: workflow :) When you go for printing, you export to PDF. And if you ever exported to PDF from Inkscape you would notice that you can select resolution. We do rasterization for blurs and SVG filters on exporting to PDF *already*. Just how much different would it be?
No, no no, this won't do at all. Go back, join the SVG W3C forum and get SVG 1.3 spec written up, if your so desperate for meshes and spirals.
Now I'm officially getting tired of that thread. SVG 1.1 which we rely on dates back to 2001. SVG 1.2 with its modules is not even finished, and it's 2009 here. SVG 1.3 is out of question for next gazillion of years. I'm sorry, but what was the point of your angry email?
Alexandre