Hi, On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 15:50 +1030, David Gowers wrote: > I think we would have to. At least, in my vision, where we want > GIH/GBR to be eventually deprecated in preference of SVG. This would > require 2 things: > a) support multiple brushes in a SVG brush file, ala GIH (presumably > a group for each brush) How useful are brush pipes (or image hoses) really? As far as I can see their primary use is for simulating brush transformations. We can already do that better on the fly. > b) support including ranks etc. information in the SVG brush file. > IMO a GIMP-specific XML element is appropriate here, for that and > brush rendering type information as you said. Probably require a > specific naming scheme, to simplify implementation of ranks. > > For bitmap images in SVG brush files (eg. for patterning), we will > probably want to use embedded images. Eventually for parametrizable > brushes, we'll want to support external bitmap references (in which > case we'll need to consider how to ensure that the user gets the right > resources and that reference links are resolved correctly (probably > relative to the .gimp-2.X/ toplevel directory)). Why don't we just use PNG files for bitmap brushes? Sven _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
