On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 01:34:58AM -0600, Oleksandr Moskalenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > * Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-21 21:57:01 -0700]: > > *boggle* > > > > > > Scribus can compress PNGs, but the default is to generate uncompressed > > files? And it's considered acceptable to label the compression ratio of > > an uncompressed image format as "Quality"? And this is a "matter of > > opinion"? > > > > Words fail me. If this is the attitude upstream has, I don't think > > it's worth the trouble to try to bring this to their attention. > > > > Daniel > > Daniel, > > I did bring it to the attention of the Scribus team. There is already a > developer working on redoing that dialog window to show and accept appropriate > PNG compression settings. The decision to generate uncompressed PNGs by > default still seems to stand though, but with clear indication of the ability > to actually select compression levels coming up it really shouldn't generate > this much ire, shouldn't it?
I don't know if "ire" is the right word. It's just incomprehensible to me why they would think this is a good idea. But I agree that even if they could just label compression levels as compression levels and let you pick them directly that would be a vast improvement. Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
