We're a funded, open source project, looking for someone to make a coherent set of diagram templates (https://app.diagrams.net/?mode=device , click new ).
This isn't a technical role. Might suit someone looking for a low pressure, low complexity role. You'll need a reasonable eye for design.
You'll need to be a independent worker. We'll say "take the current ~200 templates to 1k+ , make them useful to people, look good and be coherent as an overall set". You'll say ok and start on a plan to implement that.
Could be done part-time or full-time. If you get to 1k templates, then go to 2k, 10k if it floats your boat. Apply [email protected]
The joke is more that "you have amazing eyes" more means "you have beautiful eyes", at least in British English. "you have excellent eyes" would be how I'd comment on someone's eyesight.
Depends whether you tried to sell a license to the software, or the copyright to the software. The later you can't do, the buyer would have a fraud case against you.
The former is fine, as long as the license is the one that the software is publicly licensed under.
"Between 1967 and 1973, the Chagossians..." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagossians). That's the colonial era? They are plenty of Chagossians alive today that were evicted.
Yeah, it’s the google drive integration on draw.io/diagrams.net . Big companies want some cozy feeling so we tell them over 25 users per org is pay for.
We don’t measure it at all, but there’s plenty of companies we know are over 1k users.
Do a significant % of users realistically read stuff like this? We've had exactly the same ongoing problem for over a decade, and walls of text, FAQs, etc just don't allay concerns. People are just too cycnical to believe it, maybe rightly.
We found the best solution was to claim that pricing kicked in at certain usage tiers, whereas everything is actually free all the time.
I think this isn't a good strategy for the project, at a commercial level. They currently have a well define niche. Competing in a much larger market without a clear competitive advantage won't work.
Foreign Object support in SVG is an optional part of the 1.1 SVG. Yes, it's true that only browsers support it in practice.
The reason for its usage is historic. Originally, this project was the underlying diagramming library only, that uses the SVG DOM for rendering. There was no application and no SVG export, that wasn't a function of the library.
FOs in SVG gave us the whole range of HTML in shape labels. So, as well as complex text formatting, we used it for tables, complex composites, etc. There a large legacy of shapes that use complex HTML for labels, we can't drop support for those.
The app itself came later and the SVG export function even later. It was fairly easy to generate because we can take it from the SVG DOM. But, converting HTML to SVG requires parsing the full HTML specification and generating the SVG to maintain compatibilty. This is an horrifically large task, it would require probably 5+ people full time, we don't have that resource.
I'm not sure calling it SVG is "tacky". It is part of the SVG 1.1 spec, albeit an optional one, it's not like it's isn't SVG at all. But yes, it causes confusion, thus the entry in the README [1], "It is not an SVG editing app, the SVG export is designed only for embedding in web pages, not for further editing in other tools."
Even using SVG for word wrapping alone, we've repeatedly asked critics how to do that without HTML for measuring the font metrics, we're yet to receive an answer how to do that in JavaScript. We've had plenty of comments pointing out this is wrong, we need a practical alternative thought out in detail.
[1] https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/drawio-for-notion/p...