diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/context/sources/general/manuals/workflows/workflows-graphics.tex')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/context/sources/general/manuals/workflows/workflows-graphics.tex | 30 |
1 files changed, 16 insertions, 14 deletions
diff --git a/doc/context/sources/general/manuals/workflows/workflows-graphics.tex b/doc/context/sources/general/manuals/workflows/workflows-graphics.tex index a24d293df..2246c1c88 100644 --- a/doc/context/sources/general/manuals/workflows/workflows-graphics.tex +++ b/doc/context/sources/general/manuals/workflows/workflows-graphics.tex @@ -8,12 +8,13 @@ \startsection[title=Bad names] -After many years of using \CONTEXT\ in workflows where large amounts of source files -as well as graphics were involved we can safely say that it's hard for publishers to -control the way these are named. This is probably due to the fact that in a -click|-|and|-|point based desktop publishing workflow names don't matter as one stays on -one machine, and names are only entered once (after that these names become abstractions and -get cut and pasted). Proper consistent resource managament is simply not part of the flow. +After many years of using \CONTEXT\ in workflows where large amounts of source +files as well as graphics were involved we can safely say that it's hard for +publishers to control the way these are named. This is probably due to the fact +that in a click|-|and|-|point based desktop publishing workflow names don't +matter as one stays on one machine, and names are only entered once (after that +these names become abstractions and get cut and pasted). Proper consistent +resource managament is simply not part of the flow. This means that you get names like: @@ -29,19 +30,20 @@ like one. In fancy screen fonts upper and lowercase usage might get obscured. It really makes one wonder if copy|-|editing or adding labels to graphics isn't suffering from the same problem. -Anyhow, as in an automated rendering workflow the rendering is often the last step you -can imagine that when names get messed up it's that last step that gets blamed. It's not -that hard to sanitize names of files on disk as well as in the files that refer to them, -and we normally do that we have complete control. This is no option when all the resources -are synchronzied from elsewhere. In that case the only way out is signaling potential -issues. Say that in the source file there is a reference: +Anyhow, as in an automated rendering workflow the rendering is often the last +step you can imagine that when names get messed up it's that last step that gets +blamed. It's not that hard to sanitize names of files on disk as well as in the +files that refer to them, and we normally do that we have complete control. This +is no option when all the resources are synchronzied from elsewhere. In that case +the only way out is signaling potential issues. Say that in the source file there +is a reference: \starttyping foo_Bar_01_03-a.EPS \stoptyping -and that the graphic on disk has the same name, but for some reason after an update -has become: +and that the graphic on disk has the same name, but for some reason after an +update has become: \starttyping foo-Bar_01_03-a.EPS |