On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Martin Nordholts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  There are a couple of reaons, some of them partly overlap:
>  * It is a big UI task to define exactly how drawing tools should work
>  and how they should interact with existing tools and workflows in a good
>  way.

Hypothetically speaking, if somebody were to sit down and try to work
on this in the far, far future, it seems like there would only be two
choices, both of them fairly straightforward (I'm new to gimp but
AFAICT there's no vector-graphics layers so both choices end up with
rasterized shapes).

1) It interacts with everything the same way the paint brush and
pencil do. Draw squares, circles, etc., directly on to current layer.
UI controls are similar to other paint programs... dragging boxes,

2) It behaves the same way a text layer does. Draw squares, circles,
etc. to new "primitive shape layer" (or whatever), and they can be
edited, scaled, rotated, whatever afterwards (this gives similar
functionality to vector-based squares and circles and things).

Are both of those choices satisfactory? They seem simple and flow well
with the existing GUI, unless there is something that I'm overlooking.

I ask because if I ever happened to meet the aforementioned
hypothetical person who may work on this feature in the distant
future, I'd like to give them some useful design hints.

Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to