RE: [Inkscape-devel] Re: Inkscape 0.38 Status
2/18 2/28 3/ 8 3/18 3/28 4/1 Goal ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
- Bugs 841633-896992 52 33 28 17 14 12 9
- Open/Total Bug Ratio 33% 24% 25% 16% 13% 10% 10%
Whoo-hoo!
I propose that we now focus on the following 4 critical bugs, with the goal of fixing at least 2 before the release. 3 of them are for Windows.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=925687&gro...
If it can be easily fixed without switching to Pango, it would be great to have it fixed.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=925033&gro...
Jon Cruz fixed the same thing on linux, so maybe he can have a look. Or anyone else...
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=915374&gro...
There's a patch for this one. Bryce, you were going to look into it?
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=857311&gro...
This one is almost fixed. Adib, are you working on patches for the rest of the files?
_________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI...
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, bulia byak wrote:
2/18 2/28 3/ 8 3/18 3/28 4/1 Goal ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
- Bugs 841633-896992 52 33 28 17 14 12 9
- Open/Total Bug Ratio 33% 24% 25% 16% 13% 10% 10%
Whoo-hoo!
I propose that we now focus on the following 4 critical bugs, with the goal of fixing at least 2 before the release. 3 of them are for Windows.
Sounds like a good plan. The remaining critical bugs don't seem to be nearly as serious as the critical bugs in past releases, but if a couple can be closed that'd put us in a great position.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=925687&gro...
If it can be easily fixed without switching to Pango, it would be great to have it fixed.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=925033&gro...
Jon Cruz fixed the same thing on linux, so maybe he can have a look. Or anyone else...
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=915374&gro...
There's a patch for this one. Bryce, you were going to look into it?
No, I think that was Ted. I looked into the bug on the preferences.xml overwriting and got that one sorted out.
Bryce
On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 11:31, bulia byak wrote:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=915374&gro...
There's a patch for this one. Bryce, you were going to look into it?
Fixed. And just because I love you all, I implemented save as postscript while I was fixed this ;)
--Ted
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004, Ted Gould wrote:
On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 11:31, bulia byak wrote:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=915374&gro...
There's a patch for this one. Bryce, you were going to look into it?
Fixed. And just because I love you all, I implemented save as postscript while I was fixed this ;)
:-o
OK, so I just found the "Print Direct" option. So I think all that remains for EPS export is to add a bounding box to the file :-)
I'll take a look sometime unless anyone else wants to give me any hints ;-)
Cheers
Carl
On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 08:49, Carl Hetherington wrote:
OK, so I just found the "Print Direct" option. So I think all that remains for EPS export is to add a bounding box to the file :-)
I'll take a look sometime unless anyone else wants to give me any hints ;-)
Well, I don't know much about EPS - but if adding a bounding box at the top is all you'd need I would recommend subclassing out the PrintPS class and overloading the 'begin' and 'init' functions. This will create an EPS printer, and I could help you hack that to make it a EPS output extension pretty easily.
I was thinking about implementing EPSI with the Ghostscript ps2epsi script, but it would be soo much better to have it be internal to Inkscape (rather than depending on Ghostscript).
--Ted
On Sat, 3 Apr 2004, Ted Gould wrote:
On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 08:49, Carl Hetherington wrote:
OK, so I just found the "Print Direct" option. So I think all that remains for EPS export is to add a bounding box to the file :-)
I'll take a look sometime unless anyone else wants to give me any hints ;-)
Well, I don't know much about EPS - but if adding a bounding box at the top is all you'd need I would recommend subclassing out the PrintPS class and overloading the 'begin' and 'init' functions. This will create an EPS printer, and I could help you hack that to make it a EPS output extension pretty easily.
Well, having looked at things again it seems that the code already writes a bounding box. I think there was a sodipodi patch that added this, and that it was incorporated into Inkscape.
Having tried exporting an Inkscape file to LaTeX (which is the reason I'm interested in all this) it all works fine. The only thing left is that I'd like an option to make the bounding box the size of the objects in the drawing, rather than the paper size. I don't think this is too hard, though.
I was thinking about implementing EPSI with the Ghostscript ps2epsi script, but it would be soo much better to have it be internal to Inkscape (rather than depending on Ghostscript).
AFAIK EPS is just PostScript with a specified bounding box and without certain PostScript operators (e.g. newpage, that sort of thing). It looks to me like Inkscape's PS output will actually qualify as EPS without any further work; especially since Inkscape doesn't have the concept of pages etc.
Hopefully I'll be able to work out a patch which gives the option of calculating EPS bounding boxes from the size of the a drawing's contents. Then Inkscape will truly be an alternative for the LaTeX user who wants to draw figures. Judging by my experiences and those of colleagues, this is a big "gap in the market".
Cheers
Carl
On Sat, 2004-04-03 at 19:22, Carl Hetherington wrote:
AFAIK EPS is just PostScript with a specified bounding box and without certain PostScript operators (e.g. newpage, that sort of thing). It looks to me like Inkscape's PS output will actually qualify as EPS without any further work; especially since Inkscape doesn't have the concept of pages etc.
Well, almost. There are actually quite a few bits of required information to be compliant EPS; I don't think we supply them all yet.
I forget the name of the relevent specification though. :/
Obviously what we have is already fairly servicable though.
-mental
MenTaLguY wrote:
Well, almost. There are actually quite a few bits of required information to be compliant EPS; I don't think we supply them all yet.
I forget the name of the relevent specification though. :/
Obviously what we have is already fairly servicable though.
-mental
But I think (I might be wrong) that all of the necessary data to wrap PS into EPS is supplied as comments, so it might not be necessary to break the current code.
[snip]
Hopefully I'll be able to work out a patch which gives the option of calculating EPS bounding boxes from the size of the a drawing's contents.
This turns out to be quite easy. The question is: where's the best place to put the option for either "bounding box is paper" or "bounding box is objects"? In the save dialogue? In the main program preferences?
Cheers
Carl
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004, Carl Hetherington wrote:
[snip]
Hopefully I'll be able to work out a patch which gives the option of calculating EPS bounding boxes from the size of the a drawing's contents.
This turns out to be quite easy. The question is: where's the best place to put the option for either "bounding box is paper" or "bounding box is objects"? In the save dialogue? In the main program preferences?
Well, I've submitted a patch to the tracker which puts the option in "Document Options". Let me know if anyone thinks it should be moved.
Cheers
Carl
On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 08:19, Carl Hetherington wrote:
Well, I've submitted a patch to the tracker which puts the option in "Document Options". Let me know if anyone thinks it should be moved.
Cool. Thanks for the patch. I'll look at applying it when the code thaws out a little.
I do have one question though: Is there any reason someone would want the bounding box to not be page sized with Postscript? Any reason to have it be page sized with EPS? Are these mutually exclusive uses?
--Ted
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, Ted Gould wrote:
On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 08:19, Carl Hetherington wrote:
Well, I've submitted a patch to the tracker which puts the option in "Document Options". Let me know if anyone thinks it should be moved.
Cool. Thanks for the patch. I'll look at applying it when the code thaws out a little.
I do have one question though: Is there any reason someone would want the bounding box to not be page sized with Postscript? Any reason to have it be page sized with EPS? Are these mutually exclusive uses?
Good point. So perhaps all we need is to have separate "Save as PS" (which uses the page size) and "Save as EPS" (which uses the objects' bounding box). That makes sense to me. Although I suppose some people might want EPS with a page-sized bounding box. Not me though.
Cheers
Carl
On Tue, 2004-04-06 at 11:30, Carl Hetherington wrote:
Good point. So perhaps all we need is to have separate "Save as PS" (which uses the page size) and "Save as EPS" (which uses the objects' bounding box). That makes sense to me. Although I suppose some people might want EPS with a page-sized bounding box. Not me though.
Probably most people expect EPS to be saved with the page bounding box. Certainly all other illustration apps do so.
That being said, it isn't unreasonable to provide a UI to select abounding box other than the default, as is done for PNG export.
-mental
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, MenTaLguY wrote:
On Tue, 2004-04-06 at 11:30, Carl Hetherington wrote:
Good point. So perhaps all we need is to have separate "Save as PS" (which uses the page size) and "Save as EPS" (which uses the objects' bounding box). That makes sense to me. Although I suppose some people might want EPS with a page-sized bounding box. Not me though.
Probably most people expect EPS to be saved with the page bounding box. Certainly all other illustration apps do so.
Apart from Illustrator, it would seem ;-)
That being said, it isn't unreasonable to provide a UI to select abounding box other than the default, as is done for PNG export.
OK, I'll look into adding a UI like this.
Cheers
Carl
On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 02:00, Carl Hetherington wrote:
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, MenTaLguY wrote:
That being said, it isn't unreasonable to provide a UI to select abounding box other than the default, as is done for PNG export.
OK, I'll look into adding a UI like this.
Carl,
Do mind if I try this? I want to get the Output Extension preferences function working - and this looks like a good example.
--Ted
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Ted Gould wrote:
On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 02:00, Carl Hetherington wrote:
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, MenTaLguY wrote:
That being said, it isn't unreasonable to provide a UI to select abounding box other than the default, as is done for PNG export.
OK, I'll look into adding a UI like this.
Carl,
Do mind if I try this? I want to get the Output Extension preferences function working - and this looks like a good example.
Not in the least --- please do. I was thinking though: should EPS export be moved to be an "Export" rather than a "Save" option? It seems to be usual these days to have Export for things that can't be reloaded without loss of information.
Anyway, it would be great if you could sort this out somehow.
Cheers
Carl
participants (6)
-
Bob Jamison -
Bryce Harrington -
bulia byak -
Carl Hetherington -
MenTaLguY -
Ted Gould