Re: [XaraXtreme-dev] Xara's feature

["bulia byak" <buliabyak@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 2/19/07, Alex Bligh <alex@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If you want to pick a difference between them, far better
> pick on something like "live blends" rather than fill types (which could be
> added, rendering engine permitting, to SVG and Inkscape pretty easily I'd
> have thought).

Actually, in a sense, you're getting it backwards. Yes, live blends
are not in SVG, but it doesn't mean they can be added to Inkscape in a
completely SVG-compatible way. Inkscape can and does build upon pure
SVG to add new types of objects with their own editing behavior. One
example is the "live offset" object which updates when the source path
changes. Blends can be done in a similar way, and the reason we don't
yet have them is not SVG limitation, but simply a lack of manpower. I
really hope we'll get them sooner rather than later.

New fill types, on the other hand, are something which may be very
difficult to do in Inkscape until they appear in SVG. And SVG is
necessarily quite conservative - it will likely take many years before
the next version appears, and years more before it is widely
supported. However, difficult does not mean impossible, and given
enough demand, even something like gradient meshes can be done in pure
SVG 1.1:

http://inkscape.org/screenshots/gallery/inkscape-0.45-gradient-mesh-experimental.png

By the way, this screenshot is a good illustration of the universality
of simple Gaussian blur - you won't be able to do anything like that
with Xara's "feathering", but only with true blur.

--
bulia byak
Inkscape. Draw Freely.
http://www.inkscape.org