From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Jürgen Purtz <juergen(at)purtz(dot)de>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: First SVG graphic |
Date: | 2019-03-09 17:39:07 |
Message-ID: | 20190309173907.a6r6ghkokhbh4x3p@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 11:49:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 02:17:33PM +0300, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
> >> What is your opinion? Should we renounce the additional manual step and use
> >> only the pure "Optimized SVG" format? This will increase the
> >> 'diff-ablility', which may be valuable in the long term. But direct
> >> readability of the files suffers more or less.
>
> > Uh, so really there is plain SVG, "Optimized SVG", and readable SVG. I
> > am thinking you should store just "Optimized SVG", and provide a shell
> > script to convert to readable SVG for those that want it.
>
> Man, this discussion is leaving me disheartened. It sure sounds like
> we are going to end up in a situation where either everyone touching
> the graphics has to use the same version of the same tool (with the
> same options, even), or else we're going to have massive, unreadable,
> and mostly content-free diffs in every patch.
Yes, that might end up being the case. I think the only saving part is
that we aren't going to have lots of people editing the graphics.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jürgen Purtz | 2019-03-10 12:44:20 | Re: First SVG graphic |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-03-09 16:49:31 | Re: First SVG graphic |