Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: alpha vs. transparency / translucency

2002-12-19 Thread David Necas (Yeti)
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 12:08:55PM +0100, Sven Neumann wrote: Side effect, will be RGBA be named RGBT everywhere (in user visible interface)? Is not a bit silly to start renaming basic concepts of a field with something else (aka causing differences with reference docs that existed long

Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: alpha vs. transparency / translucency

2002-12-19 Thread Stephen J Baker
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-12-18 at 1711.13 +0100): I agree with Alan and Raphaël (see the bug report) when it comes to the What/How statement. I can see how the term alpha may be unclear to new users, but I think it would be a

Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: alpha vs. transparency / translucency

2002-12-19 Thread Raphaël Quinet
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:04:10 -0600 (CST), Stephen J Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-12-18 at 1711.13 +0100): I agree with Alan and Raphaël (see the bug report) when it comes to the What/How statement.

[Gimp-developer] Re: alpha vs. transparency / translucency

2002-12-18 Thread Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-12-18 at 1711.13 +0100): I agree with Alan and Raphaël (see the bug report) when it comes to the What/How statement. I can see how the term alpha may be unclear to new users, but I think it would be a pity to replace it all together, as this might cause users who are