Original Summary

I’m working on LottieFyr, a tool that diagnoses and repairs broken Lottie files. The obvious part is finding something that looks wrong. The harder part is deciding whether an automatic fix is actually safe. A repair that “works” in JSON can still change rendering, break compatibility somewhere else, or hide the real issue. So I’ve been pushing the tool toward a stricter rule: only auto-fix when the change is narrow, explainable, and verifiable. For example, if fractional precomp dimensions are causing an Android compatibility issue, only those affected values get changed, then the result is checked again in SVG + Canvas. I’m finding that “what should we leave alone?” is becoming more important than “what can we modify?” Curious how other people approach this in automated repair or transformation tools. https://lottiefyr.com/lottie-fix   submitted by   /u/Cosmin_Dev [link]   [comments]

  • 情报分类：商业与市场研究
  • 分类依据：内容涉及商业、投资或市场动态
  • 信息来源：Reddit · SideProject
  • 发布时间：2026/9/22 17:00:03