I just opened and resaved a simple 1.1 document in standard mode, it most certainly has polluted the file with its own crap and worst changed style attributes from standard supported CSS to its own attributes.
I am a Batik fanboy, I won't deny it, its simply the best SVG renderer out there and it follows the standard. Unfortunately, no one has created a good editor with it yet.
I do get emotional when a bunch of douche bags drool over Inkscape. Its a rather shitty piece of software that slashdot just fucking drools over because its free. People treat Inkscape like its awesome when it does the same retarded shit that IE has done traditionally. I get annoyed by all shitty software, regardless of who makes it or what its license is. I do not make exceptions for shitty software just because its free or because its GPL. Price or license are the last things on my mind when using software, I'm more concerned with it actually doing what it claims to do.
I understand the need to know what happened. I understand the amount of knowledge that can be gleaned from analyzing this event.
But do we really need to make public the messages of thousands of people full of fear and worry for their lives and loved ones?
This seems to be in rather poor taste to me.
Its one thing for a group of researchers to go over the data, its another entirely to splatter across the Internet where the age of maturity runs about half of the physical age of the person in talking. Already in response to this story their are jokes here that while funny, as a prime example of bad taste.
I'd have to say that this is an example taking the whole Wikileaks thing too far. Its one thing to post emails from money grabbing scum bag CEOs, its entirely different to post a text message from a man to his wife begging her to contact him so he knows if she's alive of dead. Some things really should be left private. And no, just because you can't tie the message to the actual person who sent it doesn't make it private.
A friend of mine works at Center, and he told me that the air force shot down flight 93.
No he doesn't. Its not called 'Center' In the air pilots refer the the control center they are currently being directed by as 'center' for radio purposes, but thats where it ends.
There isn't one 'center'. There are several around the country for handling that general area of the country, they all have names, employees don't refer to themselves as 'working at Center' They work at something like the Air Traffic Control Center, or the Washington ATRCC so people would actually know wtf they are talking about.
Stop watching bad movies and air emergency on discovery channel and thinking you know anything about how it works in the real world.
Your story is probably just crap made up by a 15 year old.
The wings are easy to damage, you just need negative Gs. They do support the entire weight of the aircraft, thats true, but they are designed to support it when the aircraft is upright, with the force fo gravity pulling it towards the underside of the wings.
The aircraft may be designed for 1.6Gs positive, and 0.6 negative, meaning that simply rolling the aircraft inverted already puts it over its stress limit. Forcing the aircraft into a dive from level flight in a hurry could easily do the damage.
The same is true for most of the rest of the aircraft. Its designed to hold together in normal flight operations, not if something is throwing the control yolk all over the place.
Several government organizations knew it was going to happen. Its public knowledge at this point. They knew something was about to happen. Terrorist chatter was up, all sorts of indications.
They just had no idea WHAT EXACTLY was going to happen. The knowledge they had didn't compute to 'they are going to fly airplaces into the twin towers'.
The knowledge they had seemed to indicate something big, from the skies... but thats about it. After it happened, it all made a lot more sense, hindsight is like that. Makes it really easy to look back at the info you had and say 'duh, I totally should have saw that coming'.
I suppose they could have 'warned us', and freaked everyone out about what might happen, but then they would have been good terrorists without doing anything at all.
You're going to have to do far better than that shitty post if you're going to throw conspiracies around.
The capability to 'bubble in' text across multiple pages won't hurt anyone. Especially if that text can be aligned to fill the width of the box.
Checkout Apache FOP. The future you're looking for above is available in SVG files using flowed text.
Of course the problem is still a lack of editors with flow support. They all want to flow it themselves and manually position the text for some retarded freaking reason.
STILL NO FREAKING SUPPORT FOR CASE SENSITIVE FILESYSTEMS ON OSX FROM ADOBE. WTF. MIGHT AS WELL JUST TURN ON THE CAPSLOCK KEY.
I refuse to buy another Adobe product until they freaking fix that. Whats worse is that I'm finding that my reasons for paying a small fortune for Creative Suite is rapidly going away. Sure its nice and would make things easier, but I'm just learning alternative, although slower, methods of accomplishing the same thing with less feature rich software.
If CS5 doesn't do it, its unlikely that I'll bother with Adobe in the future, I'll have too much time invested in knowing how to use other software better.
I do it all the time. They are both standardized vector formats. We get PDFs from customers for various bits of artwork that we need to convert to SVG to use with our software.
Re:Does it actually make standard SVGs yet?
on
Inkscape 0.47 Released
·
· Score: 1, Troll
You should continue using IE also, you'll never miss viewing web pages properly.
I was excited when I saw 'svg test suite compliance' in the release notes, then I looked at the test results. The omit a large portion of them and fail a massive chunk of them.
A new feature in the release notes is 'Initial SVG font support'... Inkscape is roughly the same as using Frontpage 2000 to make web pages. Sorry I got your fanboy panties in a bunch, but reality sucks sometimes.
If you think Firefox renders SVGs correctly, you aren't doing much with your SVGs.
Neither gecko (Firefox) nor Webkit have SVG rendering thats useful for more than basic shapes. They lack support for large swaths of the standard.
You're response is only valid if you use Inkscape to draw basic flowcharts and smiley faces, do anything complex, Inkscape, Firefox and Webkit are severely lacking.
They claim test suite compliance, if so than thats a major step to not sucking, but only if it actually saves standard SVGs. It traditionally hasn't. Its default format uses its own extensions, and its standard svg format lacked features for no apparent reason. Hell, the Inkscape extended SVG format just seems to give you some of the standard SVG features, but using custom extensions.
So great, Inkscape SVGs are renderable in Inkscape, and really simple ones will work in Firefox and Opera. Whoopdee-doo.
Do you accept a web browser with HTML 2.0 support now days? I don't.
Photoshop has a real SVG rendering engine built in, it will load files that Inkscape doesn't have a chance in hell of loading.
If you're argument is that Inkscape's lack of standard support is OK because its trying to embrace and extend the format and break compatibility with other software (again, not some extremely simple drawing) just so it can be 'the one to rule them all', then Inkscape can go fuck itself. I use SVG because it IS A STANDARD that IS SUPPORTED PROPERLY by at least SOME software. I'm not complaining about not supporting the ENTIRE standard, no one does. What it does support and how it saves on the other hand, I expect to be proper.
Again, if you think Word HTML is acceptable, you and I have completely definitions of standard. I like my 'standard' files to actually follow the definition of the standard, not someone elses own variation.
I find it amusing that your arguing that Inkscape breaking standards is acceptable because MS did it. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Why even claim the SVG file format? Just call it what it is. Why have a 'Inkscape SVG' and a 'Standard SVG' save option? Why not just call the Inkscape version the Inkscape file format and stop trying to piggy back on the SVG standard. Why introduce confusion to others?
Saving SVGs from GIMP is like saving PDFs from Photoshop.
Sure, it outputs a SVG file, but the editor is focused on editing bitmap images. Most people will get a PNG or JPG embedded in an SVG when saving an SVG from GIMP.
In the past (Its been a while since I've used GIMP so this could be completely different now), saving an SVG from GIMP would first render most everything too a raster image format, then just embed a single or multiple raster images in the SVG, turning the SVG into basically a wrapper around the layers of rasterized images.
Inkscape is intended to work on shapes and not rasterized images. Text doesn't get rasterized before saving, it gets written to the file as texts using a specific font or as curves. A rectangle is stored as a rectangle object with which a border style, fill style, and maybe a filter. Circles, and other polygons are the same.
Later when you want to resize an object stored as a shape rather than a rasterized image, you just scale the shape, there is 0 quality loss. Resize a rasterized image in GIMP to something larger and you'll start seeing artifacts rather quickly. Changing the border color on a rectangle in GIMP would require you to select the area around the rectangle with manually, with a magic wand tool, or maybe a script, then change the color of the individual pixels, overlaying the existing pixels. With antialiasing turned on this can quickly turn into a mess as it blends in with the existing colors or the background. Changing the border color in Inkscape will result in a final image without the mixing of colors associated with rasterized images as the file is really a set of instructions for drawing shapes. Instead of changing the individual pixels directly, you change the command that creates those pixels in the first place.
Inkscape is to GIMP what Flash is to Photoshop or GIMP.
SVGs also allow for animation and scripting in the file itself. Not scripting like you normally use with GIMP, but scripting like producing animation, allowing for interactivity kind of like a web page. With SVGs you can create user interfaces and applications and use them in an SVG viewer with proper support. At one point I was working on (just for fun) a clone of the Evony Flash game written in SVG and javascript. You could open it with Apache Batik or Webkit and 'play' the game. Clicking on various 'buttons' would call javascript functions to do the backend work, talk to the server, ect.
SVG is comparable to Flash in most ways except the lack of sound and video support, which are handled by other standards. Flash uses ActionScript, SVG uses Javascript.
Theres a lot of other differences and a lot of commonality between the two from an outside perspective, but you'll find that if you're editing a photo, you want to do it in GIMP. If you're drawing shapes, flowcharts, and the like, you'll want to do it with an SVG.
I read somewhere, although I can't verify it, that Southpark (The TV show, if you live under a rock) is done using SVG. Even if it isn't, Southpark would be something SVG is perfectly suited to doing, where as doing it in GIMP would surely suck ass for the guys doing the drawing and animation. It'd be relatively simple to do with SVG.
Its far from standards compliant, unless you think Word is HTML compliant when you use it as an HTML editor.
Does it actually make standard SVGs yet?
on
Inkscape 0.47 Released
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Everytime I've looked at Inkscape in the past its idea of 'standard' SVGs is about like Word's idea of 'standard' HTML, even when you switch to the standard svg format rather than its extended version.
I'm grabbing it now, but I see nothing in the release notes about this particular issue. I see things about adding more extensions which is great and all, but I use SVG because its a documented standard that I can work with in my own software, I'd love to suggest Inkscape to others, but until its capable of producing version 1.2 SVGs with text flows that work with Apache Batik is useless. The font improvements look promising, as long as it isn't retarded and storing all text as curves.
Expensive for who? The warlords that control it and use slave labor at gun point?
You know why we don't mine our own tungsten? Cause its far cheaper to let them mine it in the Congo using slave labor and not having any concern for the environmental aftermath and ship it all the way here then it is for a company to pay US wages and pretend they are going to clean up afterwords, which they of course don't, then we end up paying for it a second time in the form of taxes.
Cleaning up your own childs piss and fecal matter is a hell of a lot different than cleaning up someone elses, I'm guessing from your post you've never had to clean up after someone who wasn't a family member, pets included.
No, you need seperate servers for when the DHCP upgrade requires a conflicting library with the DNS servers which you don't want to upgrade at the same time.
THIS is where virtualization becomes useful.
On the other hand, my solutions is a couple of FreeBSD boxes with jails for each service. You could do the same with whatever the Linux equivalent is, or Solaris zones if you want. No need to actually run VMs.
Just run a couple boxes, seperate the services onto different jails. When you need to upgrade the core OS, do it on your backup box first, get all the services upgraded, switch it to your primary and repeat on the other.
Its not a matter of config files, its a matter of dependencies. If you've never run into a dependency conflict, you don't have much experience. Upgrading every service at the same time isn't always an option, sometimes newer versions in repositories are broken with regards to something you use or need.
Thats true for the first couple of years after the school is established, after which the area is saturated and new students coming out of the area can't find a job unless one of the older ones leaves.
So you're claiming that if your city doesn't have a college, it will be an uneducated mess, which is clearly false since the majority of the cities of the world DON'T have colleges. There are only so many jobs in a college town that require college education, once thats saturated there is very little need for the college by your train of thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe Bush never asked, and Obama did?
What are you, 12? Still think the matrix is real?
I just opened and resaved a simple 1.1 document in standard mode, it most certainly has polluted the file with its own crap and worst changed style attributes from standard supported CSS to its own attributes.
I am a Batik fanboy, I won't deny it, its simply the best SVG renderer out there and it follows the standard. Unfortunately, no one has created a good editor with it yet.
I do get emotional when a bunch of douche bags drool over Inkscape. Its a rather shitty piece of software that slashdot just fucking drools over because its free. People treat Inkscape like its awesome when it does the same retarded shit that IE has done traditionally. I get annoyed by all shitty software, regardless of who makes it or what its license is. I do not make exceptions for shitty software just because its free or because its GPL. Price or license are the last things on my mind when using software, I'm more concerned with it actually doing what it claims to do.
Its part of the 1.2 draft, which isn't finalized for more than the Tiny profile.
I understand the need to know what happened. I understand the amount of knowledge that can be gleaned from analyzing this event.
But do we really need to make public the messages of thousands of people full of fear and worry for their lives and loved ones?
This seems to be in rather poor taste to me.
Its one thing for a group of researchers to go over the data, its another entirely to splatter across the Internet where the age of maturity runs about half of the physical age of the person in talking. Already in response to this story their are jokes here that while funny, as a prime example of bad taste.
I'd have to say that this is an example taking the whole Wikileaks thing too far. Its one thing to post emails from money grabbing scum bag CEOs, its entirely different to post a text message from a man to his wife begging her to contact him so he knows if she's alive of dead. Some things really should be left private. And no, just because you can't tie the message to the actual person who sent it doesn't make it private.
No he doesn't. Its not called 'Center' In the air pilots refer the the control center they are currently being directed by as 'center' for radio purposes, but thats where it ends.
There isn't one 'center'. There are several around the country for handling that general area of the country, they all have names, employees don't refer to themselves as 'working at Center' They work at something like the Air Traffic Control Center, or the Washington ATRCC so people would actually know wtf they are talking about.
Stop watching bad movies and air emergency on discovery channel and thinking you know anything about how it works in the real world.
Your story is probably just crap made up by a 15 year old.
The wings are easy to damage, you just need negative Gs. They do support the entire weight of the aircraft, thats true, but they are designed to support it when the aircraft is upright, with the force fo gravity pulling it towards the underside of the wings.
The aircraft may be designed for 1.6Gs positive, and 0.6 negative, meaning that simply rolling the aircraft inverted already puts it over its stress limit. Forcing the aircraft into a dive from level flight in a hurry could easily do the damage.
The same is true for most of the rest of the aircraft. Its designed to hold together in normal flight operations, not if something is throwing the control yolk all over the place.
You're a shitty conspiracy theorist.
Several government organizations knew it was going to happen. Its public knowledge at this point. They knew something was about to happen. Terrorist chatter was up, all sorts of indications.
They just had no idea WHAT EXACTLY was going to happen. The knowledge they had didn't compute to 'they are going to fly airplaces into the twin towers'.
The knowledge they had seemed to indicate something big, from the skies ... but thats about it. After it happened, it all made a lot more sense, hindsight is like that. Makes it really easy to look back at the info you had and say 'duh, I totally should have saw that coming'.
I suppose they could have 'warned us', and freaked everyone out about what might happen, but then they would have been good terrorists without doing anything at all.
You're going to have to do far better than that shitty post if you're going to throw conspiracies around.
YAY! flowRoot seems to be supported!
Now ... if only it would let you use SVG fonts ...
Maybe in another year.
Checkout Apache FOP. The future you're looking for above is available in SVG files using flowed text.
Of course the problem is still a lack of editors with flow support. They all want to flow it themselves and manually position the text for some retarded freaking reason.
STILL NO FREAKING SUPPORT FOR CASE SENSITIVE FILESYSTEMS ON OSX FROM ADOBE. WTF. MIGHT AS WELL JUST TURN ON THE CAPSLOCK KEY.
I refuse to buy another Adobe product until they freaking fix that. Whats worse is that I'm finding that my reasons for paying a small fortune for Creative Suite is rapidly going away. Sure its nice and would make things easier, but I'm just learning alternative, although slower, methods of accomplishing the same thing with less feature rich software.
If CS5 doesn't do it, its unlikely that I'll bother with Adobe in the future, I'll have too much time invested in knowing how to use other software better.
I do it all the time. They are both standardized vector formats. We get PDFs from customers for various bits of artwork that we need to convert to SVG to use with our software.
You should continue using IE also, you'll never miss viewing web pages properly.
No, not even anywhere close to capable of what Illustrator is capable of.
A nice example from the release notes:
http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/ReleaseNotes047#Initial_SVG_Fonts_support
Inkscape is fine if you don't do anything complex. Drawing basic flowcharts and simple diagrams works perfectly well.
Interoperability and actual features are another story.
Please compare
http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/inkscape/ResultViewer.html
to
http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/batik/status.html
My standards actually are based on some standard.
I was excited when I saw 'svg test suite compliance' in the release notes, then I looked at the test results. The omit a large portion of them and fail a massive chunk of them.
A new feature in the release notes is 'Initial SVG font support' ... Inkscape is roughly the same as using Frontpage 2000 to make web pages. Sorry I got your fanboy panties in a bunch, but reality sucks sometimes.
If you think Firefox renders SVGs correctly, you aren't doing much with your SVGs.
Neither gecko (Firefox) nor Webkit have SVG rendering thats useful for more than basic shapes. They lack support for large swaths of the standard.
You're response is only valid if you use Inkscape to draw basic flowcharts and smiley faces, do anything complex, Inkscape, Firefox and Webkit are severely lacking.
They claim test suite compliance, if so than thats a major step to not sucking, but only if it actually saves standard SVGs. It traditionally hasn't. Its default format uses its own extensions, and its standard svg format lacked features for no apparent reason. Hell, the Inkscape extended SVG format just seems to give you some of the standard SVG features, but using custom extensions.
So great, Inkscape SVGs are renderable in Inkscape, and really simple ones will work in Firefox and Opera. Whoopdee-doo.
Do you accept a web browser with HTML 2.0 support now days? I don't.
Photoshop has a real SVG rendering engine built in, it will load files that Inkscape doesn't have a chance in hell of loading.
If you're argument is that Inkscape's lack of standard support is OK because its trying to embrace and extend the format and break compatibility with other software (again, not some extremely simple drawing) just so it can be 'the one to rule them all', then Inkscape can go fuck itself. I use SVG because it IS A STANDARD that IS SUPPORTED PROPERLY by at least SOME software. I'm not complaining about not supporting the ENTIRE standard, no one does. What it does support and how it saves on the other hand, I expect to be proper.
Again, if you think Word HTML is acceptable, you and I have completely definitions of standard. I like my 'standard' files to actually follow the definition of the standard, not someone elses own variation.
I find it amusing that your arguing that Inkscape breaking standards is acceptable because MS did it. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Why even claim the SVG file format? Just call it what it is. Why have a 'Inkscape SVG' and a 'Standard SVG' save option? Why not just call the Inkscape version the Inkscape file format and stop trying to piggy back on the SVG standard. Why introduce confusion to others?
Saving SVGs from GIMP is like saving PDFs from Photoshop.
Sure, it outputs a SVG file, but the editor is focused on editing bitmap images. Most people will get a PNG or JPG embedded in an SVG when saving an SVG from GIMP.
In the past (Its been a while since I've used GIMP so this could be completely different now), saving an SVG from GIMP would first render most everything too a raster image format, then just embed a single or multiple raster images in the SVG, turning the SVG into basically a wrapper around the layers of rasterized images.
Inkscape is intended to work on shapes and not rasterized images. Text doesn't get rasterized before saving, it gets written to the file as texts using a specific font or as curves. A rectangle is stored as a rectangle object with which a border style, fill style, and maybe a filter. Circles, and other polygons are the same.
Later when you want to resize an object stored as a shape rather than a rasterized image, you just scale the shape, there is 0 quality loss. Resize a rasterized image in GIMP to something larger and you'll start seeing artifacts rather quickly. Changing the border color on a rectangle in GIMP would require you to select the area around the rectangle with manually, with a magic wand tool, or maybe a script, then change the color of the individual pixels, overlaying the existing pixels. With antialiasing turned on this can quickly turn into a mess as it blends in with the existing colors or the background. Changing the border color in Inkscape will result in a final image without the mixing of colors associated with rasterized images as the file is really a set of instructions for drawing shapes. Instead of changing the individual pixels directly, you change the command that creates those pixels in the first place.
Inkscape is to GIMP what Flash is to Photoshop or GIMP.
SVGs also allow for animation and scripting in the file itself. Not scripting like you normally use with GIMP, but scripting like producing animation, allowing for interactivity kind of like a web page. With SVGs you can create user interfaces and applications and use them in an SVG viewer with proper support. At one point I was working on (just for fun) a clone of the Evony Flash game written in SVG and javascript. You could open it with Apache Batik or Webkit and 'play' the game. Clicking on various 'buttons' would call javascript functions to do the backend work, talk to the server, ect.
SVG is comparable to Flash in most ways except the lack of sound and video support, which are handled by other standards. Flash uses ActionScript, SVG uses Javascript.
Theres a lot of other differences and a lot of commonality between the two from an outside perspective, but you'll find that if you're editing a photo, you want to do it in GIMP. If you're drawing shapes, flowcharts, and the like, you'll want to do it with an SVG.
I read somewhere, although I can't verify it, that Southpark (The TV show, if you live under a rock) is done using SVG. Even if it isn't, Southpark would be something SVG is perfectly suited to doing, where as doing it in GIMP would surely suck ass for the guys doing the drawing and animation. It'd be relatively simple to do with SVG.
Its far from standards compliant, unless you think Word is HTML compliant when you use it as an HTML editor.
Everytime I've looked at Inkscape in the past its idea of 'standard' SVGs is about like Word's idea of 'standard' HTML, even when you switch to the standard svg format rather than its extended version.
I'm grabbing it now, but I see nothing in the release notes about this particular issue. I see things about adding more extensions which is great and all, but I use SVG because its a documented standard that I can work with in my own software, I'd love to suggest Inkscape to others, but until its capable of producing version 1.2 SVGs with text flows that work with Apache Batik is useless. The font improvements look promising, as long as it isn't retarded and storing all text as curves.
Heres to hoping ...
Actually, Bush didn't, you need to go back another term to find the source.
On a slightly different note, please explain what Obama has actually done differently than Bush.
Right, and no one ships their 'environmentally friendly disposed electronics' to china to sit in an open land fill.
You can say it all day long, and I still won't believe it. Certifications can be faked fairly easy.
Expensive for who? The warlords that control it and use slave labor at gun point?
You know why we don't mine our own tungsten? Cause its far cheaper to let them mine it in the Congo using slave labor and not having any concern for the environmental aftermath and ship it all the way here then it is for a company to pay US wages and pretend they are going to clean up afterwords, which they of course don't, then we end up paying for it a second time in the form of taxes.
Cleaning up your own childs piss and fecal matter is a hell of a lot different than cleaning up someone elses, I'm guessing from your post you've never had to clean up after someone who wasn't a family member, pets included.
No, you need seperate servers for when the DHCP upgrade requires a conflicting library with the DNS servers which you don't want to upgrade at the same time.
THIS is where virtualization becomes useful.
On the other hand, my solutions is a couple of FreeBSD boxes with jails for each service. You could do the same with whatever the Linux equivalent is, or Solaris zones if you want. No need to actually run VMs.
Just run a couple boxes, seperate the services onto different jails. When you need to upgrade the core OS, do it on your backup box first, get all the services upgraded, switch it to your primary and repeat on the other.
Its not a matter of config files, its a matter of dependencies. If you've never run into a dependency conflict, you don't have much experience. Upgrading every service at the same time isn't always an option, sometimes newer versions in repositories are broken with regards to something you use or need.
Stay and work doing what?
Thats true for the first couple of years after the school is established, after which the area is saturated and new students coming out of the area can't find a job unless one of the older ones leaves.
So you're claiming that if your city doesn't have a college, it will be an uneducated mess, which is clearly false since the majority of the cities of the world DON'T have colleges. There are only so many jobs in a college town that require college education, once thats saturated there is very little need for the college by your train of thought.
That entire line of thinking is just false.