Hi, by chance i was starting to check out scanning cabinet lately to organize my documents in some way ( have not yet done anything in production though ). PDFs would be more useful to me i think. If you have a separate app and are going to dogfood it that would be pretty cool too i think.
Michael ginabythebay schrieb am Montag, 2. Januar 2023 um 20:33:54 UTC+1: > I've since created PR #1643 https://github.com/perkeep/perkeep/pull/1643, > where I went with the 'creating a separate app' option (in go). > > In a PR comment, Micah asked if it would make sense to instead build the > pdfcabinet upon/into scanningcabinet. I feel like it is better to try and > continue this discussion here rather than in the PR. > > I guess I'd like to get a sense of whether anyone actually cares about > scanningcabinet. Not sure since it was sitting somewhat broken when I > started playing with it recently. > https://github.com/perkeep/perkeep/issues/1635 > > If nobody cares about scanningcabinet, perhaps the best thing to do is to > remove it. > > If someone does care about scanningcabinet, how would you feel about > merging pdf functionality into it? The primary difference, I think is the > 1:1 nature of of pdfs and documents where scanningcabinet expects multiple > images(pages) per document. > > That will show up in the UI, especially in the creation of documents. In > scanningcabinet, you are expected to select some images, then click the > button to turn that into a document. In pdfcabinet, you click the button > associated with the pdf you want. Each flow should ideally be optimized > for the user, to make it easy to create documents quickly. > > If we were to try to merge pdfcabinet/scanningcabinet together, I lean > towards some kind of mode the user can set to decide how they want to > create documents (selecting multiple items vs. a single item). > > The display of documents will also be affected by this. scanningcabinet > lays out multiple images (using img tags I assume) where pdfcabinet uses an > object to embed the pdf into the html page. This seems manageable...just > thinking out loud, but I lean towards, at document creation time, marking > the document permanode with an attribute to indicate which kind it is. > > Does anyone else have thoughts related to this? > > - Gina > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2022, at 5:30 PM, Gina White wrote: > > Hi, > > I've been poking at the scanningcabinet app and think I want something > similar to it, but with a few changes. > > 1. > Add support for pdfs. Offhand, I think this would mean possibly modifying > the upload code to accept pdfs and likewise the display code, which I > suspect is hard coded to expect multiple pages with each page as an image. > 2. > Add support for a 'who' attribute which I imagine would be somewhat > orthogonal to the tags attribute. In my view, 'who' would let one tag a > document with the senders/receivers where the tags attribute would be more > related to the type of document. So a document might be tagged 'phone, > bill' with a who attribute of 'tmobile', for instance. > > Would you be open to me modifying scanningcabinet to support these > things? If so, do you have any thoughts about the direction you would like > me to go? > > Alternatively, I could create a separate app, which could be plugged into > devcam, or not. In that case I'd be somewhat tempted to write the separate > app in python as I haven't really written go in quite a while now. > > - Gina > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Perkeep" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/perkeep/3f617d53-c62b-4bd4-aafb-c29da3ad10dbn%40googlegroups.com.
