new board or boards (and/or gallery albums)?

[brynn]

Hi Friends,
I've been asked about the possibility to make a new board which is suitable for containing the embroidery extension and potential script which is being discussed (if not finished by now).  It was suggested to call the new board "Development".

I've gone back and forth in my mind (and back and forth and so on, over the years) about creating a board such as the Programming board in InkscapeForum.  To be honest, it has always annoyed me, that Programming board, because for the most part, as a user support forum, we typically can't answer many programming questions.  (And I get tired of writing how developers aren't visiting the forum.)

"Development" is perhaps a bit more broad of a subject than "Programming", but it still might tend to attract new developers who will have to be redirected to the mailing list.  But my goal is to provide this space for the community.  So if the community thinks such a board would be helpful, I can make it in a flash!  There certainly are ways to get around repeatedly writing about developers' browsing habits.  Just let me know 

But I had another thought.  What about "Resources" board, which would contain not just extensions, but filters (maybe move Lazurs big filters topic there), templates, patterns, palettes, all kinds of Inkscape resources?

And while we perhaps start debating that, I should mention that we could also (and/or) use our gallery for that.  I could easily create albums for the various resources, and set it up so that the various file types can be uploaded.  Just like on the website, members can make a custom thumbnail, so that we don't see a page full of default icon/thumbnails.  Of course I think in general, the website would be the best place to upload these things; still, if it's wanted here, I'm glad to create it.  Everyone registered here already is registered for the gallery, so it's a smooth interface in that way.  (how to use the gallery:  https://forum.inkscapecommunity.com/index.php?topic=78.0)

Comments?

[Lazur]

Hi.

Development seems to migrate towards gitlab, which also holds community features. Probably building there would work best on the long run.


The resources board sounds good but it's way beyond our technical limits I'm afraid.
Openclipart was supposed to be the resources board from the start. Although it is watered down from that perspective now, only editor's pick would prevent that from happening elsewhere.


So, how to handle these resources. I can hardly track my own filters&files locally.
There are 471 images in my filter pack collection. Most containing 16 filters, with 6 megapacks. In total that's more than 16300 filters.
Also, it's likely I'm pulling in a filter from a previous drawing with a bit of further adjustments -"fine tuning"- instead of a pack (that I cannot find).
1st problem: there is no way to save a filter with separate setting instances with the same filter chain link.
That alone would cut the number by 16...
2nd problem: there is no visual reference of a filter. Built in filters listed are also useless in that manner, all of them are just a blind guess.
Then again, the current filter editor registers everything as definitions and there is no organising whatsoever.
For instance, you have a drawing with alot of blurring and/or blending modes going on but you'd need one specific filter extracted.
You need to go over them one by one.
3rd problem: there is no drag&drop append feature -with customized preview-, not even a single append feature.
What would that be?
In blender you can append files -import only parts of preexisting blend files (blender's default documents). That way you don't need to load in a model with countless faces just to copy/paste a material shader.
So in inkscape that would mean appending other svg-s, then a prompt would appear to select the svg elements of choice -speaking of resources, that would mean the custom filters/markers/gradients/dasharrays/symbols etc.
Imagine you trying to append your custom filter from that image with alot of blurring. It just wouldn't make sense if you didn't add an explicit tag/id to your filter -you better have a visual reference. Then again, showing hundreds of blurring definitions on a custom object?
No way. Even worse with blending filters. Those should be listed outside custom filters that could be appended.
Same goes with patterns. Guess hardly anyone name their patterns in the svg -I didn't either in that latest pattern pack.
Not mentioning copy/pasting creates new definitions and the old gradient bug of creating thousands of unused definitions...
Frankly the cleanup document option is largely unused for some reason.

Tl;dr:
a repository of resources would require *quick visual references*.
While browsing through an online database, while viewing files locally and by installing in inkscape.
Currently none of those exist.
Handling fonts would be similar however inkscape can't even update those while running =can't use a freshly installed font. Which shouldn't be as much of programming paradox as using live svg fonts.


Also using an svg host where you need to upload a separate raster image as a thumbnail is a huge burden and pointless (as if svg wasn't developed for web usage).

[brynn]

Also using an svg host where you need to upload a separate raster image as a thumbnail is a huge burden and pointless (as if svg wasn't developed for web usage).

As far as I understand, it should be possible to create an SVG plugin for the CPG (Coppermine, our gallery software) which would create the thumbnails automatically.  But it needs someone well (enough) versed in PHP, who also has the time and motivation to do it.  I don't think crowd-funding would be prohibited, since CPG is open source.

I suppose for users who create resources at the pace and number of Lazur, the automatic thumbnail would be a huge advantage.  But for those who make 1 or 2 (or even 3 or 4) per year, I don't see the extra 2 clicks needed to upload a separate PNG for a thumbnail, would be a problem.

But still, I certainly agree with you, Lazur, that all these things you mentioned - preview inside and outside of Inkscape, unique gallery or resource host, automatic thumbnail from SVG, not just for filters, but all resources; are needed by the community.  (I would say greatly needed, but I suppose the greatness of it is probably relative.)  Might be an interesting funded development project?  Or maybe GSoC project?

In my opinion, (certainly not fixable by me, haha) but well worth presenting to the developers.  We know they don't read what we post here.  We would have to take it to them.  The more researched, organized, and well-presented, the better.  Hinting around at it (as I've seen Lazur try, in board meetings) does not seem to have helped.  But what if we researched and worked up some kind of proposal - full description, overview of resources needed to realize the end goal (time and number of programmers estimated, ball park better than none...but devs could help fill in the blanks, if they thought worthwhile).

I doubt if the Inkscape website's gallery....at least not without better browser support for SVG, will ever provide thumbnails for uploaded SVGs.  I don't understand how OCA does it, whether it would be compatible with the Django website.  But worth looking into, I think.  Although if it's php-based, it won't happen until we get a full time sysadmin for the website.  (current sysadmin dislikes php greatly, afaiu)

Or if someday there will be a php forum (I mean linked into the main menu, not just on the Community page) why couldn't there be a (php) CPG which is customized to provide the needed thumbs?  (Note that they can really be slicked up, much better than I have done here - can look really professional.)  If developers see a better solution (than CPG) they can propose.  But not if they never hear the idea.

I'm not sure if many developers are aware of Lazur's huge volume of work with filters.  I keep meaning to set up a separate gallery under my account, and start uploading a bunch, but I keep not getting around to it.  (I don't know why because it would just take 2 secs to draw a round toit  yuk, yuk!)  I don't know why they wouldn't be impressed with his work - it certainly seems impressive to me!  Maybe they have no idea what we forum-users want or need (except for a couple of times when I've spouted off).  How could they?

However, until such arrangements can be made, we can still post here, in a much simpler way.  I'd be willing to help write up such a proposal to developers, if anyone else is interested.

[Lazur]

Openclipart uses inkscape 0.91 to generate thumbnails. Each svg upload is processed by command line probably by a script and by default four sizes are generated -one at 90, 210, 800 and 2400 px widths for landscape format.
That is the route of handling inkscape-drawn svg-s. So before the automatic rasterisation they look for the inkscape tag in the codes. If it's not inkscape-drawn, they use webkit (?) to generate the thumbnails.

And if you edit the url of those generated thumbnails, the server generates a new raster double at the set size. In my humble opinion that is a huge risk for a ddos attack, though there is a size limitation set somewhere for queries. Didn't receive an answer from Magirly on the topic but the site admins seems confident.

It's not just two more clicks but alot more.
First, save svg. Then, export raster image of document -that lousy box took 2-3 hours to export. (And while exporting not drawing in another instance which might cause a hang/crash.) In that order or you save your personal folder data to the svg-s by default.
After that, keep tracking the svg AND the raster image locally -like the raster image can take 10 times more space than the svg-. Name the svg and the raster copy twice the same, type the same.

After that, upload the raster image by two more clicks.
Use double bandwidth. Or, more like eleven times more.
If svg-s had a thumbnail image embedded... scalability would be pointless... and size wouldn't be small... then why would one want to upload the "unused" vectors next to the main raster image.
{[(Maybe the format of choice is not the best to start working with. Contrary developers consider being closest to the svg spec the number one design goal.)]}
Probably the rendering support is a decade behind.



Had posted a link to this topic on the devel channel without further comments. Probably I'm seen as a showoff who is always ranting about issues. I totally understand that, and how it's not working to draw attention. On the other side, the filter editor is being revised as a half step forward.

[Mc]

(And I get tired of writing how developers aren't visiting the forum.)

Sorry, I (or other devs, probably) usually don't have much time :/

1st problem: there is no way to save a filter with separate setting instances with the same filter chain link.
2nd problem: there is no visual reference of a filter. Built in filters listed are also useless in that manner, all of them are just a blind guess.

1st problem can probably be solved, but requires some thought about how it's done (filters are usually put inside a svg document, so we'd need to have "parameters" in documents… not in my todolist, but could be part of a gsoc)
For the 2nd problem, I was thinking of replacing the "submenu" that appears when you click on filters→bevels by a window with basically the images from http://tavmjong.free.fr/INKSCAPE/MANUAL/html/Filters-Preset-Bevels.html and clicking on them would set the filters so that you can see them

But still, I certainly agree with you, Lazur, that all these things you mentioned - preview inside and outside of Inkscape, unique gallery or resource host, automatic thumbnail from SVG, not just for filters, but all resources; are needed by the community.  (I would say greatly needed, but I suppose the greatness of it is probably relative.)  Might be an interesting funded development project?  Or maybe GSoC project?

In my opinion, (certainly not fixable by me, haha) but well worth presenting to the developers.  We know they don't read what we post here.  We would have to take it to them.  The more researched, organized, and well-presented, the better.  Hinting around at it (as I've seen Lazur try, in board meetings) does not seem to have helped.  But what if we researched and worked up some kind of proposal - full description, overview of resources needed to realize the end goal (time and number of programmers estimated, ball park better than none...but devs could help fill in the blanks, if they thought worthwhile).

As for the website side of things (resources, forum integration, etc), it would probably be worht discussing with Martin (I don't know much about PHP, or forums, or the gallery, or…well, anything out of Inkscape itself)

[brynn]

It's not just two more clicks but alot more.
First, save svg. Then, export raster image of document -that lousy box took 2-3 hours to export. (And while exporting not drawing in another instance which might cause a hang/crash.) In that order or you save your personal folder data to the svg-s by default.
After that, keep tracking the svg AND the raster image locally -like the raster image can take 10 times more space than the svg-. Name the svg and the raster copy twice the same, type the same.

After that, upload the raster image by two more clicks.
Use double bandwidth. Or, more like eleven times more.
If svg-s had a thumbnail image embedded... scalability would be pointless... and size wouldn't be small... then why would one want to upload the "unused" vectors next to the main raster image.

Something tells me you and I are not talking about the same thing.  I was referring to the current need in CPG, which takes 2 extra clicks to upload a PNG (plus the extra couple of clicks in Inkscape to export it) to create the raster thumbnail of and uploaded SVG.  I have no idea what you're talking about.

[brynn]

Welcome Mc!

Thanks for your comments!

Oh yes, I completely understand about developers not having time to visit forums.  But I still get tired of explaining it.  It seems that most people expect this (and/or the other) forum is run by the project management.

As for the website side of things (resources, forum integration, etc), it would probably be worht discussing with Martin (I don't know much about PHP, or forums, or the gallery, or…well, anything out of Inkscape itself)

This has been discussed at some length already.  Apparently Martin greatly dislikes PHP and refuses (even if there were room for it) to have a php forum on the same server as the website.  However, once we get a full time sysadmin, so that someone else is managing the server, along with more space, we should be able to have the forum on the same server as the website.  At least that's my understanding (which could be wrong, because of some technical things I don't understand). Unless there can be found a Django forum which provides all the features we want, a forum will never be fully integrated with the website.  Once we finally have an "official" forum, it will linked from the main menu, but still separate.

I seem to recall a discussion, or at least a brief exchange, when Lazur (or someone) asked about the gallery generating thumbnails automatically.  I don't remember what the answer was, but it was something which gave little to no hope of it happening.

However, I get Lazur's point - at least this part of it - that with SVG, why should thumbnail creation be such a problem?  We'd have to bug Martin about it, unless someone else remembers the reason why the website gallery can't generate thumbnails automatically.

[brynn]

Openclipart uses inkscape 0.91 to generate thumbnails. Each svg upload is processed by command line probably by a script and by default four sizes are generated -one at 90, 210, 800 and 2400 px widths for landscape format.
That is the route of handling inkscape-drawn svg-s. So before the automatic rasterisation they look for the inkscape tag in the codes. If it's not inkscape-drawn, they use webkit (?) to generate the thumbnails.

That doesn't sound so hard to do.  I wonder why the website gallery can't do that?

[Lazur]

Something tells me you and I are not talking about the same thing.  I was referring to the current need in CPG, which takes 2 extra clicks to upload a PNG (plus the extra couple of clicks in Inkscape to export it) to create the raster thumbnail of and uploaded SVG.  I have no idea what you're talking about.

Thought it didn't need any more explanation than given above.
Ok, then maybe try uploading some of these as svg-s -naming a few-:

heart prism
leaf-closeup
sledgehammer
watercolour drops
halftone forest
aurora borealis
kaleidoscope

Guess even opening those is problematic, yet alone exporting a raster image for thumbnail. Of any size choice.

Just because the upload process is twice as many clicks it doesn't mean the process doesn't take a hundred times more effort and resources.

Even if your svg-s are not that extreme, try uploading 10 svg-s in a row and see if those extra clicks are plausible.

[brynn]

Thought it didn't need any more explanation than given above.

Are you comparing the need to export a PNG, to become the thumbnail, to simply using a scaled/zoomed SVG for the thumbnail (maybe using viewbox)?  Are you suggesting that exporting the PNG should not be necessary?  And that a potential resource collection should make the thumbnail for you?

Are you comparing the need for the user to export a PNG, to become the thumbnail, to the potential resource collection simply using a scaled/zoomed SVG for the thumbnail (maybe using viewbox)?  Are you suggesting that it should not be necessary for the user to export the PNG?  And that a potential resource collection should make the thumbnail for you?

[brynn]

I'm sure solutions like that are possible.  I know it's possible for CPG - it just needs someone to write it.  And it sounds like OCA has a good solution.

I don't know why we can't have that.  I wish I could remember what Martin said, when someone asked about automatic thumbnails.

[Lazur]

Are you comparing the need to export a PNG, to become the thumbnail, to simply using a scaled/zoomed SVG for the thumbnail (maybe using viewbox)?  Are you suggesting that exporting the PNG should not be necessary?  And that a potential resource collection should make the thumbnail for you?

Are you comparing the need for the user to export a PNG, to become the thumbnail, to the potential resource collection simply using a scaled/zoomed SVG for the thumbnail (maybe using viewbox)?  Are you suggesting that it should not be necessary for the user to export the PNG?  And that a potential resource collection should make the thumbnail for you?

Yes, and no.

Browsers are not up to date in rendering svg straight nor a live rendering is a good idea in complex drawings.
An explicitely svg gallery should cope with generating thumbnails. Not the uploader.

For that matter I'm against every gallery option that requires the uploader to keep a separate thumbnail at hand. Deviantart does that even with animated gifs.

Well it's just a "tiny bit" of a technical problem compared to the whole idea of making a new resource board. I'm too early to jump -as always.

[brynn]

In general, I agree with you.  It's SVG, what the heck is so hard about making a thumbnail?  But when we start talking about making a resource collection for the whole community - that's beyond me or my ability to create.  I would help in whatever way I could.

We could put out a call for someone who knows SVG and PHP, and try to get the plugin for CPG.

Remind me.  I know you've told me before about the problems you see on OCA.  It seems like it generates the thumbnails like you want.  But I seem to remember you had another complaint about it.

And just an observation.  It seems like in the open source community, nothing (or at least not much) bursts on the scene, fully formed and functioning perfectly.  Things happen in small steps.  And nothing, absolutely nothing happens until at least one person adopts the idea, and gives their time an energy to present the idea to the community.  Once it's presented to the community, and the community thinks it's worthwhile, the idea starts to develop further.  Maybe it gains more interested people to help, and it starts to grow.

But you can only get so far by asking for something - a feature, an app, a bug fix, a whatever.  Usually things only happen because the person who wants it, puts their own time and energy into it.

And another observation.  As we see with forums, as an example.  There's no real top-down leadership or management going on in the Inkscape community.  I'm not sure if it's an open source thing, or is just particular to Inkscape.  But that's why we've ended up with a few different, 3rd party forums.  Maybe that explains why OCA is a separate entity?  Maybe you want to think about a 3rd party resource collection.

[Lazur]

My complaint of openclipart library thumbnail is that they are still using inkscape 0.91 which doesn't render some component transfer primitive settings as 0.92.
0.92 has issues of the same matter but it got improved compared to the previous version.
Also because of this gradient meshes are not rendered.

(For example this results in details missing, in this box:
0.91, 0.92.)

[brynn]

Hhm....  And I just realized the the website gallery does make thumbnails.  I thought that was your complaint about that gallery, but now that I think of it, it does make thumbnails.  Remind me what you miss for that one?

[brynn]

Ok, for this request, I decided it would be better to set up a new category in the gallery -- Inkscape Resources.  For now, it just has one category - Extensions - where we can put the embroidery extension or script, or whatever is happening (I've lost track a little bit).  Will add more albums, as needed.

The gallery won't accept every possible file format, and since I can't predict what will be needed, I'll just say, if you try to upload, and it doesn't accept the format, just let me know, and I'll set it up.

Of course it's not the community wide resource repository which was discussed above.  But it's the best I can do, without help from people with the technical know-how.

[brynn]

I changed my mind, as you can see, and added 2 new boards.  So in these boards, you can post links to various different resources.  And if you want to upload the actual resource itself, that should go into the gallery.  (my brain works slow sometimes, but eventually I get there, haha)

Here's giving fair notice I'm going to try and move Lazur's filters topic into the Other Resources board.  Since it's so large (and also has a lot of huge images in it), I'm a little worried it might not move properly.  Of course I'll make fresh backups before I try it.  So just in case anyone has any comments or concerns, especially Lazur, please speak up.  And meanwhile, I'll run the backups

[Lazur]

Had read this topic through again to regain a bit of track. Previous concerns till apply regarding usability.

• there is no easy drag&drop filters panel inside inkscape
• there are no customizable preview options
• there are no options to build a filterspecific interface -like those filters with "..." in their names

Why are those problems?
Because currently the only option for organising is adding subfolder options and tooltips to filters -which I added almost to none of those packs. Partly because not being avare of the feature /not pasting the packs in the share/filters folder, and because it's more of a burden going through such a filter pack with a node editor and pasting the same stuff over and over again.
Without those additional changes to the svg-s they might not suit whell a resource board? 

todo list (as of note to self too):

• continuing the filter "cookbook"
• creating mockups of filter editor&filter related features, append&drag&drop panels
• creating mockups to emphasise the need&functionality of separating blend modes/blur filters from custom ones
• revise existing filters -adding the additional inkscape tags and whatnot

"Whatnot" would be fine-tuning for comformity. Some filters perform differently at different zoom levels -probably due to the diffuse filter primitive rendering faulty of the shallow bitdepth used as an input; some dithering may help.

other considerations

• instead of going through each pack&revising them, maybe better off just have 1 filter in a file
• *with the filter structure depicted*
• tags and tooltip messages added, primitives grouped visually so the strucure is easy to follow
• input parametres are organised -which were tweaked in previous filter packs for the 16 variants -these are usually flood colours, turbulence settings, component transfer sliders

So what do you think?
Mirroring the current files, or also adding in the improvements/changes to create resources that could integrate better?

[brynn]

Well, the main thing is that the Resources boards aren't anything special or fancy.  Just a place to post links to resource.  As long as the files at the end of the link work as promoted, that's good enough.  (Oh, that reminds me.  I should make a sticky topic with instructions for installing!)

As noted earlier, we can't hope to create a database of resources, for the whole community, with all the previously mentioned desirable capabilities and features.  We could get close using the gallery.....I forget....oh right, it was the extra steps to create and upload the png thumbnails, which is the problem with using our gallery.  I think that is also lacking in the Inkscape gallery, right? 

((I suspect that someone who knows php could hack us out an SVG plugin for CPG, without getting too big of a headache.  And that would provide the automatic thumbnails.  The current CPG developers don't have time to warp their minds around SVG (or just don't want to). (maybe I'll bump my post over there - it's been a few years, so maybe there's some fresh blood)  But someone who already "gets" SVG and knows php, it shouldn't be very hard.  (microUgly had a look at it, when we first opened, but didn't have time) (I've even looked into learning php myself, and I may do it someday.  But the w3schools tutorial site says that a good grasp of javascript is needed as a prerequisite.  So there's that to do, first....) ))

But anyway, back to reality.  I think that even though your filter packs aren't suitable for installing into Inkscape whole (simply the large quantity, and vague and cryptic names for a lot of them), they are still perfectly functional and usable individually.  I was thinking to move your filters topic to Other Resources, just for better organization.  Completed Work is more for artwork (although I realize when you started, it was the closest choice available).  But I guess the topic is 'filters in action', so it's both images and filter packs.

So if you'd rather leave that topic there, and start a new topic in Resources, sometime later, where you would post, the "new and improved" filters, that's fine with me.  (Plus, I really do worry about moving it.)

I do like the idea of having 1 filter representing a whole pack, with tooltips telling how to make variations.   Or some kind of instructions somewhere.  OH!  Well already some of the filters have .... (dot-dot-dot) after their name in the menu, which means there is a larger dialog.  Maybe you could set up dialogs like that, for each filter pack?  Like for example, Color > Bump....  Having the controls in the dialog is easier for the non-tech-oriented type of user, than the filter editor.

Yes, orgainzation into folders or sub-folders would be a big improvement!  And plus, with the dialog, we can have previews!

And I certainly would save the PNG of all 16 or the whole pack, however many they are, so that people can see the possiblities.  Because while some are quite similar, others have a large variation.  Of course there's no way to use it in Inkscape, at least not yet.  But for OCA or in the message here, it would be helpful to see the possible variations.