These are the best words I've heard on UI. A program cannot decide what is better for me because _I_have_not_told_it what _I_need_. This is a principle - it should be up to user, not a program. In a most common case of saving jpeg files I would like to be able to do via advanced mode: 1. See original file settings as numeric values. That includes quality, subsampling and DCT method . 2. See my current settings (saving and restoring is OK now in RC1). 3. Have some color flag showing which ones are better. This can be done based on the estimation provided in the tread before. And the better way is to show two progress bars one under another - original vs current settings. 3. Decide which one set of settings use for file save: original or adjustable current ones. gg@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hi, > > I said when the new changes were being discussed that the "use image file > quality unless defaults are 'better'" was a bad way to go. > > Gimp should not decide what is "better" because it cannot know what is > required so cannot make that choice. > > This sort of "surprise" behaviour is precisely the kind of thing I was > warning against in making covert changes to user data. > > This sort of approach will always lead to unexpected results because it is > inconsistant. > > Stop treating the user like a dumby and trying to make choices behind his > back about what is "best" for his files. This would provide a more > consistant and predictable behaviour. > > A lot of things are now done a lot better w.r.t jpeg but I think this > aspect is still fundamentally wrong. Keeping the quality gleaned from the > file would solve this problem and provide more predicatable behaviour. > > -- With respect Alexander Rabtchevich _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
