I think that this argument is moot, as I think that Derek and I have agreed on option 3.

Well, Jeez....

I agree with you on most things, but I'm afraid that I must disagree on this one small thing. The different tracing algorithms need different parameters. Crowding a small set of "user friendly" params onto a mismatched set of algorithms would not work.

"Single scan" and "multi scan" are artificial ideas that I made up myself to fit my 3 input filters and 2 output filters onto Potrace. They do not map to anything but my weak idea of how to wedge Potrace into Inkscape. They are all silly tricks on how to make a black & white tracer work on color bitmaps. Potrace does NOT do color.

The next tracer (not Autotrace) that I have in mind works natively in colorspace, with no intermediate bitmap (thus no Preview) and works by tracing along lines of constant color slope.

Bob

mental@...658... wrote:

Quoting Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...>:

...

If multiply scanning with autotrace is possible, then there might be no reason to separate trace engines with tabs there. All we need is a switcher between engines (2 radiobuttons or a combobox). Functionality is in the first place, name of engine that provides it -- in the second ;)

Yes. We ought to use the hierarchy dictated by the users' needs, not the structure of the implementation.

-mental

---