Pro+ and new Image Filename option

[gwpriester]

I just used lower case and dashes and it works. The one image I was having issues with was the exception which I discovered when I looked at the other images in a separate tab.

So I exported the problem image with the correct title, then replaced the current image with the new one and used the use image name option and it worked.

It was the simplest solution which for me is always the best.

[Egg Bramhill]

[Acorn]

@Xara - in passing.

The new Image Filename function is still seriously flawed.
Drag the default image in the Bitmap gallery to the design page.
Name it default.
Preview.
In ../xr_files.txt, with WebP enabled, you get:

• index_htm_files/default.jpg
• index_htm_files/default.webp

Clone across the page - say four copies.
Preview.
The same image filename is used for all 5 copies - PERFECT.

Rotate Copy#2 by one degree.
Preview.
Now, in ../xr_files.txt, with WebP enabled, you get:

• index_htm_files/default.jpg
• index_htm_files/default.webp
• index_htm_files/default-1.jpg
• index_htm_files/default-1.webp

This a a FAIL as CSS can readily rotate an image.

Scale Copy#3 by 1px:

• index_htm_files/default.jpg
• index_htm_files/default-1.jpg
• index_htm_files/default.webp
• index_htm_files/default-1.webp
• index_htm_files/default-2.jpg
• index_htm_files/default-2.webp

Again a FAIL.

None of this is necessary as CSS Transforms are not destructive of a image.

---

A major FAIL your developers have not addressed is when you take a clutch of images and give them a base name, say utensil.

For five utensils, you will have utensil, utensil-1, utensil-2, utensil-3, utensil-4:

• index_htm_files/utensil.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-1.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-2.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil.webp
• index_htm_files/utensil-1.webp
• index_htm_files/utensil-2.webp
• index_htm_files/utensil-3.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-3.webp
• index_htm_files/utensil-4.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-4.webp

When you change any one, you get:

• index_htm_files/utensil-5.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-5.webp
• index_htm_files/utensil-6.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-6.webp
• index_htm_files/utensil-7.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-7.webp
• index_htm_files/utensil-8.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-8.webp
• index_htm_files/utensil-9.jpg
• index_htm_files/utensil-9.webp

Make a second change and you flop back to the original numbering.
Ditto if you close and reopen.

All you have right is a clone and a translation.

The case that I have already raised these matters in the Dear Xara Forum without any response is damning.


The base image ought to be utensil-0 for each of follow-on coding.
A change in the stacking order also mucks up the filenaming but only following a close and reopen.

Acorn

[Egg Bramhill]

Yes, the silence is deafening Acorn. What is most annoying is that the devs don't even acknowledge the points you raise

[gwpriester]

IMHO Acorn is providing a professional service which could be very helpful to Xara. But I agree, they never respond so what's the point?