I take the reactions of the last days as a strong consent to go on with the effort to integrate graphics into the documentation and use SVG as the language which creates such graphics. Also the proposed parallel handling of two SVG files - a rich but tool-specific version (optional and not normative) and a poor tool-independent version (mandatory and normative) - for the same graphic seems to be accepted. The community agrees that this way is not optimal because the use of different SVG-tools will lead to unnecessary problems - but there is no consensus about tools.
What shall we do next:
- I will create one or more wiki pages where the procedure is described. Everybody can extend this pages or contribute to their discussion sites. The pages will be found in the category 'Documentation' and its subcategory 'SVG' (to be created).
- Actually, we have the very simple example 'PageLayout.svg' and an example of medium complexity 'gin.svg'. For testing purposes we shall have a third one of high complexity and with many different graphical elements. Can someone send such an example - as a screenshot or in any other format?
- I want to engage everybody to identify important issues of PG and visualize them (similar to Oleg's proposal). We will have a - possibly long lasting - period of experiments with different examples. I think, it's necessary that we make our experiences with different tools and proceedings (one person creates a graphic, another one contributes changes, using the same or a different tool, ...). Those examples shall not be pure academic use cases. They shall reflect real situations with the expectation to be included into the documentation - one day or another.
- In the initial phase, it may be helpful to do some centralized clearings on the first SVG source files. 'Copy&Paste' is widely used and the first examples will have the meaning of a lighthouse.
- I will contact our web-team to discuss style-guide related issues.
Kind regards, Jürgen