Open main menu
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

SVG layers and translations

I would like to raise a few questions regarding SVG files that concern translations:

1.-I understand layers are discouraged in SVG files uploaded onto Commons. Is this correct? If so, is there no way/special format to have layers that can be later seen using the different programs available (I understand the problem with layers is not them per se but that the way each program stores them is different)? Can the SVG file be saved somehow in inskape so that layers are preserved but at the same time this is done in a way that makes those layers compatible with other software and not inkscape-specific?

2.-When it comes to translating SVG files, I find layers most helpful as I can usually hide any non-text objects and concentrate on changing the text layers. When dealing with a plain (i.e. non-layered) file I keep selecting the wrong object all the time as they are all grouped together, making selecting text difficult at times and much more time-consuming. I normally use inkscape for translations and would rather not resort to text editors to carry them out. The web translation tool has failed me quite often lately and I find it a bit unreliable. If my understanding in 1 above is correct and layers are not recommended in Commons SVG files, is there a recommended alternative graphic, fast and easy way to perform translations similar to the one I currently use when layers are in place (i.e. hide non-text layers and translate the test labels using inkspace)?

Thank you in advance for your advice.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 20:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Where did you get the impression layers in SVG files were discouraged on Commons? This is not true! As long as layers are used in a reasonable way (and what you describe sounds reasonable) I don't see any reason not to use them.
There's one caveat though: Don't expect layers you create in one SVG editor to be recognized as such in another editor. The information that a specific group of objects should be a "layer" is often application specific. However in any case the SVG should still be rendered absolutely correctly! --Patrick87 (talk) 22:31, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
I may have misunderstood the paragraph but here it says: "To optimize compatibility across browser platforms it is generally best to save most SVG files in "plain SVG" format whenever possible.[...] In Inkscape, for example, plain SVG format removes layer information. For this reason you may wish to create a plain version just for uploading to Commons and retain an alternative ‘fancy’ master version for your own purposes,...". I understand this to mean "try NOT to upload layered SVG files but plain ones instead". Does it mean something else?
On the other hand I was not worried about a layered SVG nor rendering properly (most of layered files I have seen seem to do so without problems) but about having to choose between breaking a rule (by keeping the layers in place to make changes easier for future editors) and abiding by it and making any change rather cumbersome (at least at times). But if my understanding was incorrect and layers are welcome then there is no problem. Thank you!--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 04:26, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm not the one who wrote "NOT to upload layered SVG files", but from my experience, it means a "<g>" (group) tag which is defined as "layer" in Inkscape's definition, this is not recognized in W3 SVG specification and could cause miscommunication among SVG graphists. In one occasion, a user was unable to edit an SVG file in Inkscape but other users was unable to in non-Inkscape application. It turned out that Inkscape uses a self-defined attribute in <g> for "locking" that layer from editing in Inkscape (similar to Photoshop's layer lock). -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 06:32, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
I think most of us agree on that we should try to upload files that are as "open" as possible and not specific to a program e.a Inkscape, Illustrator and so on. We that do graphic work in svg files has all had the same issue as the translators has when we are editing, making a derivative from a plain svg.
  • One can use switch element but to me this way has the same problem as doing it in a text editor. Different languages don't occupy the same length to describe the same thing, as we all know. So from my experience you very very often has to view and edit both the texts, size, placing and surrounding objects to get it all to work from a graphic point of view and to keep the legibility.
  • One way could be that we upload a version where we keep all the program specific information and tag it with the proper template to show this; Inkscape, Illustrator... Then we can create and add a new template "master" to this file. In the "master" template there has to be information on how to save the new language version or derivative work as plain svg ones it's done. It should also NOT be possible to upload a plain svg over the full master svg file. Maybe there also could be a corresponding "master" category where to store them.
  • I do see that this is not a perfect way and that it has disadvantages but I also see and understand the problems that exist now. --Goran tek-en (talk) 10:50, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
I think it's more productive if Inkscape uses a different extension (e.g. ".inkscapesvg") for containing their own metadata rather than messing with the general .svg format. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 14:33, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry Sameboat but I don't understand what you mean. We are not talking about changing anything just adding template and category? Please explain more so I (maybe more than me) understand, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:17, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
I do not think that one should follow this recommendation blindly. First it says whenever possible, so one can argue when it is possible and when not :-) More seriously, the main reasons for using plain SVG is to avoid program's own information in the file which may give unnecessary information or create issues when decoded by other programs. It increases the size of the file too. However, svg is quite flexible format and using correctly additional namespaces should not be a problem. They can be easily ignored if they are not necessary. In this sense, minimum information can be added with a different namespace and should not be a problem. Personally I keep the Inkscape layer information in plain svg by adding the inkscape: namespace and preserving the attributes inkscape:groupmode="layer" and inkscape:label="layer-name".--Ikonact (talk) 12:24, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
It may be a silly question and I apologize in advance in case everybody else knows but: how exactly can that (I mean "adding the inkscape: namespace and preserving the attributes inkscape:groupmode="layer" and inkscape:label="layer-name"") be done from within inkscape (assuming it is indeed ok to generate a plain SVG AND at the same time preserve layers)? If preserving layers is ok provided they are kept at the same time a plain SVG is generated, that would be ideal for me (and I think for others creating translated SVG files), but I do not know how to do it. So I should say I have 2 questions:
1.-Are layers (or what inkcape calls layers anyway) really ok to keep in the end?
2.-If so, how do you add the namespace and the attributes from within inkscape (I am sure it come be done manually from a text editor, but I would rather not struggle with XML code)?
Thank you.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 14:52, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
This is exactly what I also meant by my question to Sameboat above.
I'm a graphic worker and I use a "see what you get" program for my work, I'm not in to code and that stuff more than what I really have to. To work with the xml code all the time is not something for me and I think it will scare of a lot of other graphic workers also. We really have to make things work for as many as possible and not just for a small specialized group of people. So at this stage I think it would be better with a template and category so you easily can find the files that are made for the purpose of easier translating, editing. This way we still can use all the different "standards" that all ready is in use, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:29, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I am not aware of other way than editing the xml. If you think the file will need further editing in Inkscape, then upload it as an Inkscape SVG and tag it with {{Created with Inkscape|IMPORTANT=yes}}. If the only issue is the translation than decide what is more important - layers for hiding any non-text objects or ensure better compatibility with more difficult way of handling translations. :-). --Ikonact (talk) 11:33, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Problem uploading a derivative SVG map and errors validating the original one

Hello, I am trying without success to upload this map which is translation of this one. I tried verifying my version here but I get no errors (just warnings). When I try to validate my file as well as the original one here all I get is "That file doesn't appear to be an SVG file." (for both!). I am at at loss on what may be wrong. Could someone check and let me know what needs changing/removing? Thank you!!--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 09:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Requesting change of upload wizard image for mr

Hi,

For Marathi language upload wizard presently used image File:Licensing tutorial mr.svg has some readability issues remaining, Marathi wikipedians created a different image at latter stage File:Licensing tutorial Marathi.png which has a better redability but is not in svg, can some one help out to upgrade File:Licensing tutorial Marathi.png to svg and load at File:Licensing tutorial mr.svg.


Thanks and regards

Mahitgar (talk) 18:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)