Making export formats more intuitive: a proposal for order and classification

[Pyanepsion]

Hello everyone,

The current order of export extensions is not very intuitive. It doesn't seem to follow a clear logic, be it based on alphabetical order, date of creation of the format, type of use (web, print, photography, etc.), image quality, or the proprietary or free nature of the format.

This confusion can be frustrating, as it forces the user to wade through all the available options.

I propose two alternatives:

1. A simple alphabetical order, immediately understandable by all. Here, in brackets, is the sequence number the extensions should have.
   PNG(8), JPEG(5), GIF(3), TIFF(12), PSD(9), PDF(7), SVG(10), WMF(14), EPS(1), EXR(2), HDR(12), TGA(4), JPEG XL(7), WEBP(13)
2. An order based on the main uses of each format, with each category then sorted alphabetically.

It would also be useful to add an icon next to each format to symbolize its main use. Here's how the formats could be grouped:

• Raster formats (bitmap/raster): These formats are based on pixels. They include : EXR, GIF, HDR, JPEG, JPEG XL, PNG, PSD, TGA, TIFF, WEBP.
• Print formats: These formats retain the quality and detail important for printing. They include:  EPS, PDF, TIFF.
• Vector formats: These formats are based on geometric shapes and can be resized without loss of quality. They include: EPS, PDF, SVG, WMF.
• High dynamic range formats: These formats can store a wide range of colors and luminosities. They include: EXR, HDR.

It should be noted that some formats can belong to more than one category. For example, PDF can be both a print format and a vector format. Similarly, EPS is both a print format and a vector format. It's also important to point out that not all raster formats are suitable for printing.

This is all the more relevant in the context of a user interface that must be easy to understand and use.

• Intuitiveness: A good interface should be intuitive. Categorizing export options either alphabetically, or according to their primary use, helps the user quickly and easily understand which option to choose, without the need to perform additional research or remember specific details about each format.
• Efficiency: By grouping formats by type, users can more quickly identify the type of format they need, which can speed up the selection process.
• Education: This can also be a way of educating users about the different uses of file formats. Users may not be aware of the differences between raster, print, vector and high dynamic range formats. By organizing the options in this way, the interface offers a learning opportunity.
• Accessibility: Adding icons to symbolize the main uses of formats can help users who prefer visual information, making the interface more accessible to a wider range of people.

However, it is important to take into account cases where certain formats belong to more than one category. It may be necessary to make it clear in the interface that certain formats may appear in more than one category, or to find an intuitive way of representing this.

[GarryP]

I think this other suggestion may be relevant here:

Maybe a mix of the two suggestions would be good.