[Openicc] OpenICC GSoC 2011 ideas

[Richard Hughes]

On 28 March 2011 09:54, Kai-Uwe Behrmann <ku.b at gmx.de> wrote:
> The above proposal completely misses the driver part.

What's a "driver part"?

> We have notoriously mentioned here on list, that a device only ID is bad
> usability.

I'm not sure how you can relate the concept of usability to a low
level textual descriptor. Can you explain what you mean?

Usability is describing the success of how the user is executing
several high-level use-cases using the GUI tools. Whether the tools
are using device-ids, or some fuzzy matching has nothing to do with
usability, it's just a implementation detail.

The benefit of using an ID to map a device to a profile is that we can
say "colord has mapped *this* profile to *this* device for reason
*foo* and then when using oyranos we get the same device->profile
mapping appear in the dialog. It might be that oyranos and colord
differ too much in the internal implementation to make this possible,
which would be a shame.

> Things like the Gutenprint and EDID colour related options should
> be part of the ICC device profile association.

I think the EDID data belongs as metadata on the profile, and perhaps
as well even on the device itself (again, as metadata) for the
purposes of matching.

Could you perhaps write a short specification document explaining how
the oyranos device to profile matching is done so we can find some
common ground?

Thanks,

Richard