2011/6/29 Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> > We should focus on things Web authors want to do. > > Well, as one of them I agree with that assumption. However by simply providing as generic tools as possible you'll achieve much more. Web authors can be very resourceful to twist the technologies to reach what they have in mind >:-) the CSS3 box-shadow property is a very good example, Web authors use it to build much more complex things than simple drop shadows. With fonts, having generic tools to access the core of individual glyph open a wide range of unpredictable creative usages. I know it's amazingly naive, but if Web authors could do something like the following, it opens doors to incredibly creative things : var myFont = document.getFont("My Font Name"); // Need to see if it's doable to work with the CSS font-family name, not sure it's that easy due to CSS font variant. var length = myFont.character(\uXXXX).glyphs.length // Number of alternative Glyphs available for a single character for(i=0; i < length; i++){ // Getting a single glyph var glyph = myFont.character(\uXXXX).glyphs[i]; // returning an SVGElement // Do stuff on the glyph which is an SVG DOM tree <- imagination belong here // Setting back the glyph on track myFont.character(\uXXXX).setGlyph(i, glyph); } My 2ct (definitely not more in such a complex matter ;) -- Jeremie ............................. Web : http://jeremie.patonnier.net Twitter : @JeremiePat <http://twitter.com/JeremiePat>Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 21:28:22 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:41 GMT