Mmmmm...but why? There's an awesome interface that
would do everything
we want. Why code from scratch a "basic...interface"?
I think his point was that it would prevent having to depend on a
third-party. There's something to be said for keeping it all "in house"
-- Jim R. Wilson (jimbojw)
On 8/13/07, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/13/07, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > For example, someone decided that a 3/4 view of a camera wasn't as
> > good as a full front view. They twisted the image electronically to
> > make it look kinda like a frontal view, but this left part of the
> > camera body missing. So they painted it in. I'd take less issue with
> > the fact that their paintjob looked poor were it not for the fact that
> > they got the shape of the camera body quite wrong. :( So the
> > EnWikipedia (at least) article had a inaccurate hack job of an image
> > for a few weeks for that particular camera before I noticed it and
> > reverted the image on commons. :(
>
> Yeah. Sounds like a good-faith edit that went horribly wrong.
>
> > Compared to that I'm not too worried about brightness/color/cropping..
> > etc.. but I think that using an external site for this is completely
> > wrong. Dynamic crops should be a native feature of our repository,
> > you should be able to upload a single image then define alternative
> > views which are on the fly generated crops. Other really simple
> > alterations (like most of the ones offered by that site) could be
> > offered this way.
>
> We've discussed this in the past, but it's a fair bit of work, and
> nothing came of it. I'm not sure if a formal proposal was made
> anywhere, but there were discussions to allow attributes, like
> [[image:foo.jpg|cropx=15,150|brightness=+3]]. Obviously that would
> have readability problems.
>
> It looks like you're suggesting having a dynamic view on another
> image, though, something like: [[Image:foo2.jpg]] which contains text
> like #IMAGEVIEW [[Image:foo.jpg]] with other tags indicating what
> kinds of tweaks to apply.
>
> That could be good too. I don't think the two proposals are mutually
> exclusive. Could I also suggest making it easy to display a particular
> revision of an image. Then you would never be affected by someone else
> editing the image later on.
>
> > I played with the site (on a friends computer, it requires flash), the
> > interface is snazzy no doubt, but all the manipulations it offers save
> > red-eye are things that Imagemagic could provide... I could pretty
> > easily setup a basic ajax interface that offered those filters and let
> > you tweak their settings in real time.
>
Mmmmm...but why? There's an awesome interface that
would do everything
we want. Why code from scratch a "basic...interface"?
>
> Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>