On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, vio wrote:

> * Stephen J Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020304 10:27]:
> > On 4 Mar 2002, at 4:10, vio wrote:
> >
> > > After browsing the gimp-1.3 TODO list, I would like to add my little
> > > suggestion of things I would wish from Gimp: how about also developing
> > > a clear path towardsGimp as a "web graphics server".
> >
> > Wouldn't it make more sense to push Gimp's scripted rendering features
> > into the browser (as a plugin) and send just the script to the user's
> > machine for interpreting?   It would presumably be a LOT less bandwidth
> > than sending out an image...particularly if you are doing animations.
> I don't understand what you mean by "Gimp's scripted rendering features"?
> That the Gimp plugin/script source code is stored on the browser side?

(Not that I'm particularly advocating this as a thing to do - but...)

I meant: Sending the plugin source code to the browser from the server
along with whatever it takes to invoke it with the right options.  Of
course this means scripting in a 'safe/portable' language that can't be
used to create terrible havoc on the client side - so this is probably
a non-starter.

> And a browser plugin: which browser? Exactly.


OK - forget it - I was just thinking that it would be better to transmit
a couple of dozen lines of ASCII script than a megabyte of image generated
by that script...but it's not really going to work for lots of reasons.

Steve Baker                      (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]           http://www.link.com
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]       http://www.sjbaker.org

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to