W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: [css21][css3][svg] SVG and unit-less length values

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 09:35:11 +1200
Message-ID: <AANLkTikMK3azUa2bzDw+k06CbFDvsF+wDOZh5L80fY-n@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Cc: public-fx@w3.org, www-style@w3.org
2010/8/15 Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>

> 2. There are a few use cases (already mentioned, technical drawings,
> maps etc), that require absolute units, at least absolute units for width
> and height of the root svg element. Primarily the lengths have to fit
> precisely for printers for example to give such a technical drawing to a
> mechanical work shop to produce a real object, else SVG is not usable
> for such applications and authors need still another format or still have
> to
> draw everthing manually on millimetre paper without the option to reuse and
> to archive this on their computers - and will maybe never switch to a
> standard like SVG, if such W3C formats continue to have problems with
> such simple 'real use cases'.
>

The new definition for CSS 'in' etc is perfectly suited to such
applications. We promise that when printing, 1in is one inch. That is what
you need.

We don't promise that 1in is one inch when you view the same drawing on your
phone. But your technical-drawing use case doesn't need that. In fact, the
new definition is more useful than the old definition for your use case,
because with the new definition the drawing is more likely to be readable on
your phone.

Rob
-- 
"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]
Received on Sunday, 15 August 2010 21:35:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 15 August 2010 21:35:45 GMT