On 7 May 2008, at 4:57 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > > On May 7, 2008, at 7:25 AM, Christiaan Hofman wrote: > >> >> On 7 May 2008, at 3:17 PM, Derick Fay wrote: >> >>>>> >>>>> To somone's comment, >>>>> "Count me as another voice wanting Skim integration. A question >>>>> regarding this ? would/could quicklook provide the bridge for >>>>> this? >>>>> If skim files are 'quicklookable' (I think this is planned) >>>>> couldn't >>>>> DT use the quicklook image of Skimmed PDFs?" >>>>> >>>> >>>> The question is: use for what? QL cannot provide Skim integration >>>> for >>>> PDFs, as those are handled by the system (and QL allows only a >>>> single >>>> plugin for each file type). There is already QL support for .skim >>>> files and .pdfd bundles. >>> >>> >>> >>> Can't one override the system plugins? This guy has done it for >>> folders and zip files: http://d.hatena.ne.jp/t_trace/20071124/p3 >>> >> >> No, AFAIK they can't be overriden. I think if you have more than one >> plugin for a UTI it gets confused and you end up with nothing. > > I thought that bug was fixed in 10.5.1?
Didn't know that. I also have not tried it myself, I was parroting you ;) > It was noted as a bug on the > quicklook-dev list, anyway; IIRC the search order is bundled in app, > ~/ > Library, /Library, /System/Library. If two apps have a plugin for the > same UTI, then your order becomes non-deterministic. I use a syntax > highlighting plugin that manages to override the system plugin for > plist and source code, so it's possible at some level. > >> >> >> Your example is irrelevant, as the system does not have QL support >> for >> folders and zip file, so he's not overriding anything. >> >>> A Skim QL plugin to override the system pdf could behave as follows: >>> - if there are no annotations, just display the pdf >>> - if there are embedded annotations, display the pdf with the >>> annotations >>> - if there's a skim file in the same location (i.e. under the same >>> conditions where skim asks if you want to load the external notes), >>> display the pdf with annotations >>> >> >> Apart from the fact that it's not possible, I don't really think it's >> worth it. QL is meant as a quick preview, not for reading. I'd say >> that just the PDF is more than sufficient for that. > > For in-depth study and annotation, QL is not the right tool, but I use > QL all the time for skimming/reading PDF/text/html files since it's > lightweight and fast. However, ISTR from previous discussions that > the DT users just want to see notes/highlights on the PDF; since Skim > doesn't give those via QL, they're SOL. > > Notes-on-pdf could easily be done for .pdfd by saving a separate copy > of the pdf with embedded notes in File.pdfd/QuickLook/Preview.pdf, but > would bloat up file size and save times. Otherwise it would require > pulling all of Skim's drawing stuff into a QL plugin...which would be > very difficult. > > -- > adam A problem with that approach is it would make saving about 30 times slower. That's not worth it, as i don't see why lots of users would have to pay for a few for whom this would be useful. BTW, it would not require all the drawing code, but it would require the custom note code. And it would be slow, as PDFDocument is slow. Christiaan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Skim-app-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/skim-app-users
