Re: [Inkscape-user] Mission
Hi Andrew,
Providing a vector image editor by using SVG as the basis, is pretty
much Inkscape's strength. It isn't an svg editor directly and it isn't
an unhinged vector image editor. It's a grounded project that works
within the format specification to do some truly amazing things to
provide tools to artists, graph makers and many others. And that has
included pushing the SVg specification forwards at times.
Could you imagine is Inkscape was in the position of Gimp (poor gimp),
where the internal format wasn't a standard and svg was a conversion?
Firstly all the users who use Inkscape because their software outputs
svg files, wouldn't have a natural home for tweaking their graphics.
Then think about it the other way round. Saving in Gimp is torture,
it's constantly bugging you to save as xcf, you can't open xcf in a
browser, can't open it in a different image editor, can't process it
with python as a text/xml file for science. It's a burden.
Sure, Inkscape has done some dumb things (svg 1.2 text) but it's also
done some good things (gradient meshes + js). It's trying hard to live
up to artists' expectations about tooling, while not becoming
undisciplined about the importance of standards setting and data
formatting. SVG standards plus user standards equals good software.
Best Regards, Martin Owens
On Wed, 2019-03-20 at 13:44 -0700, Andrew Kurn wrote:
While viewing those videos about fund-raising, one point stuck in
the back of my mind. Make sure you know who your target audience is.
Inkscape has bothered me a little bit by being neither quite fish
or fowl. It tries to be friendly to the artist, but it forces
him to learn a lot about the nature of SVG. In fact, its founding
principle seems to be to use SVG as its internal representation.
(Is there a mission statement?)
I happen to like it, but that's because I'm a professional
programmer,
so formal languages are my bread and butter. But, if /I/ am the
target audience, then the direct manipulation of XML is too weak
for my taste. (I use Emacs. My favorite scenario would be to
squirt the XML over to Emacs, edit, and squirt it back. . . .
(with some indication of what is selected, but that's for another
thread.))
So that's the conflict.
That is, it seems to me that the goal of making it friendly to
the artist and friendly to the programmer are in conflict.
Maybe you can do both.
Andrew
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-user mailing list
Inkscape-user(a)lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-user