Nobody in this thread called anything about Inkscape "bloat", nor said that code related to what they don't use is "bloat". Go back and check the archives. I brought up "bloat" with respect to Firefox.
*sigh* Which was your reply to Donn's comparison of firefox to Inkscape as another example of a program that was good at a lot of different things. Maybe it was not your intention to say Inkscape's new features will lead to Inkscape being bloatware, but it certainly came off that way.
The "bloat" is not causing the slowness. There is a lot in Inkscape that needs refactoring, and a lot that needs refinement and optimization.
Nobody in this thread said Inkscape is currently bloated. What I said, although not in so many words, is that glomming on the feature list recommended by Donn Ingle would greatly increase its complexity.
Some of Donn's stuff is right on the money, and have already been discussed in previous emails and on IRC. If you've got some issues with particular items, that can be discussed. Dismissing someone's personal wishlist wholesale isn't very helpful.
We do not need to be tossing out good ideas which are asked for by our professional graphic design users that make Inkscape more useful because some users are content to use it only for laser cutting (as an example).
In that case, the professional graphic design users should prioritize which good ideas are most important
They do, all the time, in fact. And most of them are written into the roadmap somewhere.
And those pro graphic designers should give us some ideas of how to implement those ideas in a way compatible to SVG1, or else brainstorm to come up with an idea of how to implement stuff incompatible with SVG1 within separate executables.
Uh, no. :) SVG1 is a delivery format for simple vector graphics. SVG2 will eventually become a delivery format as well because it's no longer developed. That's exactly what this thread is about: some users have it in their minds that everything must be somehow crammed into an SVG, and viewable in browser. Well, it's not going to happen. Inkscape will always be able to save/export to SVG1 and SVG2 as a delivery format, and read those formats back in for use in other projects. However, those formats simply don't cover the complete needs of a pro-graphics construction file. We even have mesh gradients now, which is not officially in either spec. Guess we should abandon that too, just because some people like Inkscape the way it is? No... no I think not. :)
Please (everyone) stop referring to the hard work and superior features that are being proposed as "bloat". It's disrespectful to the devs,
Oh HELL no. If devs hugely complexify software to the extent that it becomes buggy, slow and incompatible, they ruined the software, and deserve disrespect. It should be noted that nobody in this thread made that accusation about *Inkscape* developers.
Except Inkscape IS a complex program. You're saying everything that can not be done in SVG1 should be excluded. Everything else is "bloat", right? Frankly, I don't know what you're trying to say at this point. :)
I did, however, say that if Donn Ingle's long laundry list of changes were implemented en masse, and especially without regard to the SVG standard, it would result in complexity (a better word for bloat).
The whole point of the Donn's list was that Inkscape needs to grow beyond using SVG as a CONSTRUCTION format. Specifically because there's a lot more we want to do, and unfortunately the world has lost interest in making SVGs better. Nothing done to SVG2 spec affects the SVG1 spec, and nothing done to inkscape's construction file after svg2 is set as the last svg "standard" will affect svg2 after that. The OP was simply saying that the functionality of inkscape should not be limited to things only covered by SVG2, which is already the case (it already contains awesome new features that will not make it into SVG2). So I have no idea what you're arguing about. :)
The only real question is: Do we keep calling Inkscape's native construction format called "SVG".
It's already confusing, because you can save a "plain SVG file" and an "inkscape SVG" (non-standard) SVG file, and both have the extension .svg. Changing inkscape's construction file format to something like IVG (Inksape Vector Graphic) would actually help protect the standard svg(1) and svg(2) file formats from the need to include all the new stuff that has already been added and is in the works.
For example, take mesh gradients: If we already saved in IVG format, we wouldn't have issues with users complaining about it not showing up in browser. That's reserved for the SVG standard (which is only a standard if it's accepted by most web browsers). It's specifically because SVG should remain pure that we need another format, which will no doubt continue to be based on SVG with extended options.
So don't worry! SVG is safe. It's not going anywhere, and while we may disagree what should be in Inkscape feature-wise, at least we can agree that standard SVG files should remain usable in their *standardised and agreed upon format*.
Hey, I never said Inkscape is perfect. Nobody who has ever done a gradient in Inkscape would make that statement. What I'm saying is it's pretty darn good, so don't break it in pursuit of the "perfect".
I don't think you need to worry about that. And yes, definitely agree about the gradient banding issues. :)
-C
No one is suggesting that your use case should be affected. Users who are happy with how Inkscape is will probably notice only that Inkscape is faster,
"Faster" isn't the usual result when a bunch of features are added. There are limits to the wizardry of even the best programmers.
has more useful node tools and layer grouping modes, and is cleaner and easier to work with in general, affording more screen real estate for drawing.
Sounds like you've got some work cut out for you, suggesting a specification for node tools and layer grouping, and for Inkscape's graphical user interface.
Lots of improvements on the way, let's not denounce them beforehand.
I'll denounce them beforehand every time someone suggests a combination of an OLE type thing *and* video *and* multipage *and* Javascript framework *and* XCF *and* 3D *and* Python interface *and* immitation of Flash *and especially* dumping the SVG standard that allows me to use Inkscape as a tool to do some pretty cool stuff. How would you like to code all that crap? How would you like to do support on the finished result? Yeah, me neither. It was a horrible idea, as stated.
That next feature you think you don't need might be the best thing that ever happened to your work flow.
Happens all the time. But it happens only when the next feature is part of an incremental improvement policy, carefully designed for simplicity and encapsulation, carefully crafted, and released only when it's ready. However, when it's quickied into the code, especially as part of a laundry list of almost unrelated other features, the only way it improves my work flow is if I move to a superior program after the current one collapses under the weight of its complexity.
SteveT
Steve Litt April 2017 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-user mailing list Inkscape-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-user