Re: Color Model - my last thoughts - we hope ;-) + trans.

[Joel Biddier]

The more I think about it, you should focus on transparency more than 
color scheme if this is a distraction.
Unless there is a serious link between the two.

It is technically more important to have a good transparency effect then 
color scheme for high end printing for *most* users.
On the other hand, I just think we should not be too short sighted on 
the scope of the output of the new Skencil product.
Currently, I am just unsure how deep down the code chain adding CMYK to 
the RGB scheme will go.

RGB will cover most ground.  An optional "out of gamut" warning (without 
CMYK actually implemented) may be an easy way out - that can be 
implemented at a higher level (even on the panel widget level). This way 
a user can keep track of the RGB colors that are "save" (within reason) 
to translate. Later if a CMYK translator or scheme is implemented the 
impact will not be hard - on the user, that is.

OK, I will say no more on this (I know - please ;-) ), other than I'll 
look into it some time December. We don't have a color expert on hand, 
but that does not mean we cannot educate ourself enough to implement 
something. A talk with the Scribus people may not hurt (they may have an 
expert on hand).

> - Transparency: In 0.7 transparency is limited to the fill. Is there a
> reason for not allowing transparency also for the line color attribute ?
> In other applications transparency and color values are always bundled,
> i.e.  everywhere a color appears there is an associated transparency
> value. As a consequence it is then possible to have gradient fills with
> e.g. the transparency varying from transparent to opaque.

> -The "bundling" would mean to either directly implemented transparency
> into the color model or to introduce additional transparency parameters
> for the line color and gradients points.

Which do you think will be easier for you to do? Will it make things 
easier or harder in the long run? You decide.

It sounds like a good idea to include transparency to the color scheme 
(emphasis on word "sounds"). I am not sure of the implications of doing 
this. But I like the idea of transparency being built it at the base 
level - rather than an after thought. On the other hand, will 
implementing transparencies outside of the color scheme make more 
flexable transparency effects?

The idea of transparency on lines is nice (but not vital).  I am 
guessing that if the color has a transparency built in, you can do neat 
things such as transparency blends with more ease. I see thing in terms 
of blends rather then gradient fills. Blends are far more powerfull than 
gradient fills and give the artist more control (simple blends separate 
Skencils from many of the newer vector programs out there.). Gradient  
fills can only do so much.

Whatever you decide (you are the lead coder - go for it :-) ). It will 
not be the end of the world if you chage your mind later on something  
;-). Hopefully, there will be more coders to work with you then. I hope 
I can get to a stage where I can take a crack at some things - but for 
now side-line yapping is my game. Thus you should take what you think is 
usefull and drop what you think is noise and code ;-).

--J

P.S.

Here is a hint - about 10 - 20% of what I say has some validity, the 
rest is just crap off the top of my head ;-).