hi Calle, Welcome aboard on the OpenRaster train.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 05:55:52PM +0300, Calle Laakkonen wrote: > First, layers and nested layer stacks have coordinates which default to 0. I > assume these are relative to the parent element? I think this is the only definition that makes sense for a deep rendering stack. No absolute coordinates. Someone should clarify this in the wiki. > Second question is about the size attributes. If a size has been > explicitly defined for a layer and it differs from the actual size of the > source data, should the image be resized or cropped to fit the layer or > should the manually defined size be ignored? Likewise, how should a stack > whose size differs from the computed size of its contents be treated? I would say that, whenever a size is given, this can only mean cropping. Resizing might not make sense for some filters, like a filter that generates an infinite pattern. >From the Wiki: > ..."width" and "height" are positive integer, their default value is set > to the value defined by the data source for a layer... Thinking about this, I don't see any benefit for the width/height attribute at all, as opposed to using an explicit crop filter when needed. It seems like an unneccessary and tricky task to calculate those default values. I used to think this was a good idea to define the image frame (something I want to introduce soon in MyPaint), however even this does not work at all, at least not consistently with the position in the <image> tag. Can we just remove generic size/height attributes from the spec please? Any objections? > Third, what is the range of the opacity property? I assume it is 0.0 to 1.0, > but this isn't specified anywhere in the OpenRaster docs. Yes, we even discussed this shortly on IRC, but only managed to turn it into a float, instead of also defining its meaning. Fixed in the wiki now. > It would also be nice to have an attribute to mark a layer as hidden > independant of its opacity. Yes, probably. I guess this is quite an application specific feature. My suggestion would be that you set opacity=0.0 for hidden layers, and add extra attributes somewhat like unhidden_opacity=1.0, hidden=True. This should make all applications work correctly. I think we still lack consensus how to handle such a situation. But I would say just go for such a backwards-compatible hackish solution, and maybe even add it to the standard like this. Objections, anyone? > Finally, what's the status of the text element currently? DrawPile has > annotations, which are pretty much equivalent to text layers in other > programs (except that DP annotations always float on top of the image), so > naturally I'd like to be able to save those as well. I have no idea. I think the way to go is that you propose something, and when neither GIMP nor Krita people say something, you add it to the standard. bye, Martin _______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
