Okular moving

[Wilfried Huss]

Am Donnerstag, 16. November 2006 20:47 schrieb Thomas Zander:
> On Tuesday 14 November 2006 10:16, Stefan Kebekus wrote:
> > as far as I see, there are substantial differences in Ligature and oKular
> > when it comes to DVI and PDF files. I feel that these are quite important
> > for a number of people.
> 
> In KDE4 the concept of user-comes-first should be the first and foremost 
> design goal.
> This means that choosing who you create the software for and the usecases that 
> those users will meet is where I see the biggest value of finding out if the 
> functionalities of the apps overlap.
> Afterall, just looking at a feature list is shortsighted and does not describe 
> an application very well.
> Looking at the goals of an application and the core user that is targetted by 
> the application instead, will tell you that.
> 
> A huge portion of the features you listed in your email seem out of place for 
> either app. As Tobias also pointed out.

Why? Would you like to have an image viewer were you cannot crop the image,
or rotate it? Deleting pages from a PDF file, mergin two PDF files, or rearranging
the pages in a PDF file, are functions that I do expect of a good PDF viewer.

Also there are no other GUI programs that can do this things. It might be possible
in Scribus, I'm not sure, but it would be very clunky. And Scribus is definitly not
designed for this.

> I suggest that the app-maintainers sketch a profile (personas + goals) of 
> their app and see where the two apps overlap.

Well, the targetaudiance for Ligature are definitely people that create documents
and not only read them. A strong focus lies in a good TeX workflow.

> With the friendly suggestion that the maintainers should work hard to make 
> those overlapping areas share code to the max.

Well Okular and Ligature share all fileformat backends: Poppler, DjVulibre,
Ghostscript, libtiff, kdvi. That is really the hard part. 

> The TWG can then decide which application is most mature (not just codewise) 
> and is most in line with the userbase of KDE as a whole.

As if there were an homogeneous userbase of KDE. And even if there were one,
how would you find out what this userbase is?

Greetings,
Wilfried Huss