Re[6]: [PEAR-DEV] previos message

Hello Mika, Sunday, September 16, 2001, 3:30:50 AM, you wrote: MT> On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, Martin Jansen wrote: >> According to this rule I don't know anymore if Image_Common >> is an appropriate name for it. Perhaps Image_GDConvert would >> be better since converting images (that's the purpose of your >> class, isn't it?) isn't what I would call common image operations. MT> I think the idea of the class is to provide common oo interface MT> to some image related functions (opening, saving, converting MT> between formats). By calling the class Image_GDConvert you MT> would limit it to be only wrapper for GD which I dont find MT> too usefull (only usefull part would be getting rid of different MT> ImageCreateFromXXX() and imageXXX() functions. MT> If we would call the class Image_Convert it would leave room MT> to use other additional graphics libraries such as imLib. This MT> would make the class much more usefull since you would have MT> common api between these. MT> I dont think Image_Common is appropriate name either since MT> "common" should be a base class which to me means much more that MT> opening, saving and converting between formats. Then again MT> if the class will later include other functions such as scaling, MT> getimagesize etc etc. Image_Commong might be a good name after MT> all. I think, there is no hard limit to adding new methods. Opening, saving and converting are base methods for most database-related projects. But sometime we all need more complex functions to working with images, than ImageString(), etc. It can be, for example, printing aligned text to image (right, center instead of default left align). AlignedText() can be added to this class and much more methods, wich can be made working with images easy. First test page at http://volginfo.ru/im_test/ -- Best regards, Denis mailto:info@volginfo.ru