[Qgis-developer] many SVG symbols disappeared

[Duarte Carreira]

Yes,  I think so. That would allow a simple upgrade path inside an organization/company/state agency.

Duarte

-----Mensagem original-----
De: John C. Tull [mailto:jctull at gmail.com] 
Enviada: quarta-feira, 15 de Maio de 2013 18:26
Para: Duarte Carreira
Cc: Tim Sutton; Olivier Dalang; qgis-developer; Giovanni Manghi
Assunto: Re: [Qgis-developer] many SVG symbols disappeared

Hi everyone,

On May 7, 2013, at 1:42 AM, Duarte Carreira <DCarreira at edia.pt> wrote:

> If we can get hold of the old symbology lib than that's fine by me. But please don't make us and others rebuild their entire organization's cartography just because you don't like the symbols.
> 
> Thanks,
> Duarte

An option to get the old symbols should suffice, right? Instructions on what needs to be done with these symbols for each platform might also be helpful.

> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: Tim Sutton [mailto:lists at linfiniti.com]
> Enviada: segunda-feira, 6 de Maio de 2013 21:56
> Para: Olivier Dalang
> Cc: Nathan Woodrow; qgis-developer; Giovanni Manghi; Duarte Carreira
> Assunto: Re: [Qgis-developer] many SVG symbols disappeared
> 
> Hi
> 
> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Olivier Dalang <olivier.dalang at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I was asking that question on this thread :
>> 
>> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Ideas-on-the-SVG-symbols-library-
>> t
>> d5040508.html#a5046486
>> 
>> Maybe I didn't emphasize enough on the deletion of symbols...
>> 
>> IMO, the most elegant solution is to keep only the good-looking 
>> symbols so we provide a simple and consistent library, and then to 
>> provide a link on the website to download the unmodified 1.8 symbol 
>> library in case one needs to keep full backwards compatibility (it's 
>> quite easy to install : you just have to replace the SVG folder in your installation folder).
>> 
>> The whole pull request already breaks backwards compatibility with 
>> all other symbols, since by removing their background, the may become 
>> unreadable on most of the maps...
>> 
>> So if the priority is the keep old projects looking the same rather 
>> than having a clean and consistent library, the best is not to change 
>> the svg library at all.
>> 
>> (just as an illustration, do you really think it's pertinent to keep 
>> this in the library ? :
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/jj9e852r08w5ysp/north-arrow_10_with_map_lay
>> e
>> rs.png
>> )
>> 

I use that symbol all the time! /sarcasm

> Yeah that ain't pretty...
> 
> Personally I like Oliver's patch and I think we should clean up house for 2.0. Keeping compatibility is useful but most of my project files from 1.8 are already broken to some degree and I would prefer we do all the big changes in 2.0 and then become more conservative in subsequent 2.x releases.
> 

+1