On Sunday 14 October 2007 14:02, vivek khurana wrote:
Dear JTD, Thanks for expressing your views and I dont feel there is any use in replying to half cooked arguments of yours. You are not willing to look at the real problem and no one can understand the real problems with inlscape untill you have the domain knowledge. You are refusing to look at analogies presented from other domains but looks like that was insufficient. I used these analogies to bring out the seriousness of the missing features.
You did not which was exactly the point i was making. You made a blanket statement (like many others do) xyz is not ready for use.
I understand that you belong to the group of people who would be happy to fart one million lines of code in the name of "FOSS"
Farting a ton of FOSS code is alot better than lapping up prop shit u know.
but will not spend 10 minutes trying to understand the problem which has to be solved.
Which according to you is put xyz widget here or there to do this and that the same as some other piece of your favourite tool does?
There are no excuses for bad quality software weather it is foss or non-foss. Any compariosons with cost etc is useless untill you can use it for what you want to achieve.
Absolutely. But depends on what is your definition of quality.
Inkscape has several serious problems/mistakes. First of all inkscape will not export (images or selections) in any format other than png. At times you simply dont need png and png implementation is known to be broken for several non-foss and foss applications. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Inkscape shouts about SVG format and they are yet to fully implement SVG 1.1 standard.
And adobe does?
You can have a look at the road map and with little doamin knowledge you will realize the blunders in Inkscape development. Now I expect everyone to do mistakes but I do expect them to fix them *in time*. Overall inkscape has a really long road to travel before it can touch the quality of other softwares in the same domain.
Time will tell.