On 8/10/06, Alexandre Prokoudine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/10/06, Jon Phillips wrote:
I'd like to elaborate on e). We can't design a flawless new file
format just theoretically, because as soon as we start implementing
support for it, we shall struggle with all kinds of issues. And we
clearly don't want revisions of specifications submitted to OASIS,
don't we? :) This is why we need some (or two) applications as a
testbed. Right now feature-wise Krita (trunk) and Cinepaint are close
to being such testbeds. GIMP needs integration of GEGL first.

GEGL doesn't need integration into GIMP to be used as a testbed, in I
am already using it as a testbed to develop my ideas for how to
implement a layer tree structure. The GEGL gallery[1]  are examples
that are composited from XML as part of the documentation when
building current GEGL CVS. Right now I'm working on a minimal
compositing editor (a GTK+ based tree view similar to the one I had in
bauxite[2] for editing the structure, but at least not initially
painting.)

When that is working, I'll start a second iteration of documenting the
abilities this way of dealing with it provides. As well as ponder
whether any of the features lost on the way from oxide[3]/the XCF2[4]
proposal are too large losses. (mainly features related to
animation/keyframing of properties and combination of compositions
into timelines for NLE use).

/Øyvind K.

1: http://pippin.gimp.org/gegl/gallery/
2: http://pippin.gimp.org/bauxite/
3: http://pippin.gimp.org/oxide/
4: http://pippin.gimp.org/xcf2/
--
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»
                                                -- William Gibson
http://pippin.gimp.org/                            http://ffii.org/
_______________________________________________
CREATE mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create

Reply via email to