[Clipart] RE: clipart Digest, Vol 7, Issue 50

[Sigmascape1 at cs.com]

or body 'help' to
>    clipart-request at freedesktop.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>    clipart-owner at freedesktop.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of clipart digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Open Clip Art Library - Release 0.06 (Bryce Harrington)
>   2. Re: Problems with svg_annotate (Bryce Harrington)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Bryce Harrington <bryce at bryceharrington.com>
>Subject: Re: [Clipart] Open Clip Art Library - Release 0.06
>To: Jonadab the Unsightly One <jonadab at bright.net>
>Cc: clipart at freedesktop.org
>Message-ID:
>    <Pine.LNX.4.50.0409292326500.28823-100000 at sherborne.bryceharrington.com>
>    
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Jonadab the Unsightly One wrote:
>> Bryce Harrington <bryce at bryceharrington.com> writes:
>> > I also noticed that certain images have too many keywords, but
>> > didn't have time to address that.  
>> 
>> Leave the keywords on them unless they're inappropriate for the image.
>> Ultimately we won't be making a copy of the image for each keyword the
>> image has, because we'll only be grabbing images that have the
>> keywords corresponding to the categories in the heirarchy XML, or
>> something like that.  Extra keywords may facilitate searching.
>
>Yup, that's what I'm planning in the near term.  Longer term I think we
>need some form of keyword editing capability.  For instance, if we have
>'mammal' and 'mammals' as keywords, we'd want to have an easy way to
>combine both of these groups together (along with 'mamal', etc.)
>
>> > I don't know what we should do in the future - include duplicates
>> > (probably, but hogs space), 
>> 
>> I think we should include duplicates, but not for _every_ keyword an
>> image has, only for the ones that correspond to categories -- and even
>> then not if the image also has a keyword that gets it listed in one of
>> the _subcategories_ of that category.  So, a dolphin image would be
>> copied under "Mammals" and under "Fish" probably, but *not* also under
>> the overall "Animals" directory.
>
>Agreed.  I doubt I'll be able to implement this for this weekend's
>release, but we'll see...
>
>> > use symlinks (would only work on *nix), 
>> 
>> We could produce separate packages for the major platforms.  Far down
>> the road, envision a downloads page containing this excerpt...
>> 
>> Download Open Clip Art Library 4.7, English Language heirarchy, with
>> thumbnails:
>>   * for Microsoft systems:  EXE installer.
>>   * for RPM-based Linux systems:  RPM package.
>>   * for Mac OS X: DMG disk image.
>>   * for POSIX systems:  ZIP package.
>>     (Your filesystem must support symbolic links.)
>>   * for POSIX systems:  gzipped tarball. (No symlinks.)
>>   * for Mozilla OfficeBird: XPI extension.
>>   * for the Parrot Operating System:  PAR archive, images
>>     and toolkit (requires Perl 6.2 or higher).
>> 
>> Well, okay, I got carried away there.  But anyway, we could provide a
>> package with symbolic links for people who can use it as well as one
>> with duplicates instead.
>
>Eeeek, yeah, you make a good point.  I would definitely prefer to
>provide just ONE package that suits most systems, and that means that
>symlinks are probably out of the question.
>
>> > select which dirs appear in a package, 
>> 
>> Yeah, that's what the XML heirarchies are about.  Not every keyword
>> should have a directory, I think, and the Yorkshire Terrier doesn't
>> need to be under Animals and also under Dogs separately, because if
>> the XML heirarchy says that Dogs is a subcategory of Animals it can go
>> under Animals/Dogs instead.
>
>Yup.  
>
>I think I sort of know how the hierarchy stuff needs to be implemented,
>but am really hoping there are others more creative than me who can come
>up with good solutions for the hierarchy needs.  Guess we'll have to
>see, though, it's a tricky problem to solve.
>

Hi guys,

Things are really looking good! I find myself refering to certain images over and over.  Great job!

MLF

---------------------

Sigmascape Interactive
www.sigmascape.com