Disussion: Wikimedia re-evaluates svg-renderer
Summary:
Wikimedia uses librsvg 2.40, which is know for bugs (e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Librsvg_bugs).
There is a never-ending discussion about re-evaluation about svg-render, however I made some benchmark-sets and compared correctness and time: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T40010#7031414 (more details here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JoKalliauer/SVG_test_suites)
Inkscape is an editor not mainly a rendering-engine.
So I would like to know what do Inkscape-Developers think about there own software might being used for Wikipedia?
Do you think Inkscape is a good idea for mass-rendering of SVG-files on a server?
A issue is that running inkscape "$file" -w ${WIDTH} --export-type="png" for every file much slower than inkscape --shell --actions=" file-open:${file}; export-type:png; export-width:${WIDTH}px; export-do; file-open:${file}; export-type:png; export-width:${WIDTH}px; export-do; " with all files, since starting/quitting inkscape for is very slow.
benchmark summary
| SVG | librsvg 2.50 | resvg 0.14.0 | Inkscape 1.0 (restarting for every file) | batik 1.13; 1.14 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W3C correctness | 0,662 | 0,831 | 0,745 | 0,801 |
| W3C time | 13m 23.399s | 0m 42.104s | 22m 55.256s | 70m 16.007s |
| ReSVG correctness | 0.754 | 0.956 | 0.729 | 0.703 |
| ReSVG time | 4min 05sek | 2min 30sek | 46min 22sek | 61min 29sek |
| featured correctness | 0.92 | 1.00 | ? | ? |
| featured time | 5m 17,701s | 4m 46,639s | 15m 28,202s | 11m 30,768s |
| time 2006-MediaWiki-collection (512px) | 23.129s | 9.551s | 87.313s | 186.809s |