Am Samstag, 8. Oktober 2011, 18:51:05 schrieb K?re S?rs: > On Saturday 08 October 2011 12:33:28 Burkhard L?ck wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2011, 08:44:18 schrieb K?re S?rs: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I feel a bit guilty here... I have not updated the documentation in a > > > very long time :( > > > > > > The solution for this problem is "right click" -> "Clear selections". > > > > A well hidden feature, adding GUI keyword to commit messages will notify > > kde- doc-english at kde.org about such changes. > > > > > If there is somebody interested in maintaining the documentation for > > > Skanlite I would not mind :) Writing documentation is not one of my > > > strengths... > > > > One question: > > Settings dialog: > > "Disable automatic selections"? > > I see no different behaviour selecting/deselectiong this option, but > > maybe I'm blind. Please elaborate. > > A bug :( > > I just fixed it in trunk. > Hmm... Updated and tried again, but somehow I still don't get it.
Please explain what happens/should happen and the use case for this option. > > An outline for a new section "Sanning multiple parts of an image" > > > > Usecase: You need only certain parts of an image. > > Instead of scanning the whole picture and then using a graphics > > application (e.g. kolourpaint) to save the different parts into separate > > files, let skanlite do it for you. > > > > Workflow: > > Scan a preview > > Use the &LMB; to select the first part in the preview. > > Hoover with mouse -> click "+" icon -> red border > > Select the other details in the same way > > Remove a selection -> hoover with mouse -> click "-" icon > > &RMB; context menu -> Clear Selections > > Settings - adjust Image saving options (location, name format, preview > > etc) If you are satisfied with your choices use Scan button to get all > > selections in one go. > > The trailing number of the file name is automatically increased. > > Thanks :) > > Maybe the save settings could be a separate chapter, because it is also > connected to batch scanning from automatic document feeders. > Yep, makes sense, I did not have automatic document feeders in mind. Thanks. -- Burkhard L?ck
