Re: RFC: require librsvg to implement SVG image support

[Aaron Hill]

On 2023-01-15 3:24 am, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> My conclusion is that PDF is the more "logical"
> successor to the inclusion of EPS.)

There is a philosophical issue: EPS (and SVG) are intended to be used as 
embedded vector graphics.  PDF is a document format.  EPS/SVG are the 
diagrams and illustrations; PDF is the whole book.  That said, there 
could very well be use cases for embedding one PDF into another, so 
perhaps I am thinking too narrow here.


> > It then falls to the development team to make this request a reality
> > within the limits of their abilities and time and factoring in any
> > technical roadblocks.
>
> And this is exactly what scares me: I don't think we should go to all
> lengths here in order to fulfill a user poll.

No one is (or should be) suggesting "all lengths".  I do not want to 
rathole on this point, as I do not want to take up more of your time 
than necessary.  But perhaps it is worth taking a moment to examine why 
you believe this work is pushing your limits of comfort.  At least, I 
cannot see how actionable user feedback driving features is anything to 
be scared of.  But I would readily concede that view, if your natural 
instincts are onto something I am overlooking.

Again, I feel like maybe I am making things worse joining this 
discussion, so I have no problems just sitting back if I am being a 
disruption.  At best, I am a very minor contributor to the LSR, not a 
developer.  I really do value all the hard work you all put into this 
project and would never want to overstep boundaries and make 
unreasonable demands.


-- Aaron Hill