|
From: | Aaron Hill |
Subject: | Re: RFC: require librsvg to implement SVG image support |
Date: | Sun, 15 Jan 2023 04:03:43 -0800 |
On 2023-01-15 3:24 am, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
My conclusion is that PDF is the more "logical" successor to the inclusion of EPS.)
There is a philosophical issue: EPS (and SVG) are intended to be used as embedded vector graphics. PDF is a document format. EPS/SVG are the diagrams and illustrations; PDF is the whole book. That said, there could very well be use cases for embedding one PDF into another, so perhaps I am thinking too narrow here.
It then falls to the development team to make this request a reality within the limits of their abilities and time and factoring in any technical roadblocks.And this is exactly what scares me: I don't think we should go to all lengths here in order to fulfill a user poll.
No one is (or should be) suggesting "all lengths". I do not want to rathole on this point, as I do not want to take up more of your time than necessary. But perhaps it is worth taking a moment to examine why you believe this work is pushing your limits of comfort. At least, I cannot see how actionable user feedback driving features is anything to be scared of. But I would readily concede that view, if your natural instincts are onto something I am overlooking.
Again, I feel like maybe I am making things worse joining this discussion, so I have no problems just sitting back if I am being a disruption. At best, I am a very minor contributor to the LSR, not a developer. I really do value all the hard work you all put into this project and would never want to overstep boundaries and make unreasonable demands.
-- Aaron Hill
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |