Subject: Re: Graphic Images
From: WJCarpenter (bill-abisource@carpenter.ORG)
Date: Fri Apr 20 2001 - 12:24:01 CDT
dom> It's worthwhile to also consider those apps which also wish to
dom> generate ABW documents, such as KWord, wvWare, a CGI or perl
dom> script, a bonobo component using abi as its viewing component,
That's half the picture (but time-distant in importance to the rest of
the world). Sorry my fingers were too tired to actually say clearly
what I meant.
I was talking about the other half. Suppose you want to export an .ABW
document into format .FOO because you want to send it to someone who
uses FooWriter, and it doesn't grok .ABW. What format do you use for
the embedded graphics? If FooWriter can handle PNG perfectly, no
problem. If FooWriter has problems with PNG but gets other formats
right, the other formats are probably better candidates.
Now, you can blame this on FooWriter is you like (lots of fun, but not
productive to the end users). However, what will it look like if you
receive a .FOO from someone, edit it slightly (and in the process
convert the embedded, unchanged graphics to PNG), send it back, and to
the FooWriter user it looks like crap? I think the answer is obvious:
AbiWord will look like it broke a good document.
OK, I don't actually know of a particular instance of FooWriter and
some graphics formats. I'm just depending on the statistical nature
of quality in today's software environment.
-- bill@carpenter.ORG (WJCarpenter) PGP 0x91865119 38 95 1B 69 C9 C6 3D 25 73 46 32 04 69 D6 ED F3
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Fri Apr 20 2001 - 12:23:24 CDT