At 04:31 PM 6/18/2007, you wrote:
Quote:
I can live with images of a fixed size or pre-set options with max dimensions. I can even live with images printing on their own row to minimize impacts on roster loayouts/views. I would like images to dynamically scale when loaded, at least to conform to maximum dimensions (much like eBay does when you create an auction) so that I don't have to pre-scale my images, but I don't need crop or other image edit functions built into AB... I can edit images externally.
Since my original enhancement request got slammed by someone that missed the all important premise that this functionality is supposed to be optional (they were worried about ink), I'd appreciate any feedback either originate from LWD or be constructive, such as "I'd prefer image functionality to do X" or "I'd prioritize this after A & B, before D"... "I hate images" or "I'd prioritize it as never" don't move a discussion or product in a positive direction... they just demonstrate you're bitter and/or have no better ideas to offer.
|
Image support IS something on the todo list of AB, including user-added images. However, there are two key factors working against it actually getting added. The first issue is that there are very different expectations from different users about how it should work. This means that adding it in a way that the majority of users find to be "good" requires quite a inherent flexibility in the mechanism (i.e. lots of work). The second (and more important) issue is that not that many users have indicated that this is something they would find useful.
When we prioritize features for inclusion, there are three primary factors the come into play. First, how many users will truly find this feature valuable? Second, how must the feature be implemented so that is works well for the vast majority of those users? Third, how much effort will be required to accomplish that goal?
When you have a feature is the not widely requested, complex to design, and will require lots of work to implement, it usually gets bumped in favor of other features that rank higher in those areas. The only exception to this is if it's a feature that is near and dear to either Colen or myself, in which case it will sometimes get squeezed in (but usually still ends up being dropped).
So what's needed is a proposal that details a cohesive way in which unit images should be handled within AB, including within the UI, in roster output, and in saving that information (i.e. how/where to save information that can be readily moved by the user in the saved roster files). The proposal needs to subsequently get significant support from the user base for inclusion in the next update. If that is achieved, then it's something that will have a high probability of getting added. There are already a bunch of items that meet these criteria for the next update, so nothing is guaranteed, but that's how to get this feature moved up the priority list.
Hope this helps,
Rob