W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > December 2002

Re: Identical rendering? [was Re: SVG 1.2 General feedback]

From: Thomas E Deweese <thomas.deweese@kodak.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:51:55 -0500
Message-ID: <15852.54043.992793.181540@frog.rl.kodak.com>
To: Leonard Rosenthol <leonardr@lazerware.com>
Cc: Thomas E Deweese <thomas.deweese@kodak.com>, Vadim Plessky <plessky@cnt.ru>, www-svg@w3.org

>>>>> "LR" == Leonard Rosenthol <leonardr@lazerware.com> writes:

LR> At 4:18 PM -0500 11/21/02, Thomas E Deweese wrote:
>> >>>>> "VP" == Vadim Plessky <plessky@cnt.ru> writes:
>> 
VP> Than talk to Adobe to switch their ASV from closed-source
VP> implementation to FreeType.  And ask Batik guys to use FreeType,
VP> too.

>>  Does FreeType do stroking and dashing of outlines?  Typically this
>> isn't needed for rendering text but is needed for svg.

LR> 	What FreeType will do in this case is return to the caller the
LR> vectors that make up the glpyh and you can do then do your own
LR> stroking/dashing.

    Then I turn the results into pixels how?  Getting access to the
glyph vectors is the easiest part of the whole thing.

    You could have two rendering paths one that is used strictly for
simple text (solid fill, etc) that uses FreeType and a totally
separate rendering path for stroked, dashed, pattern filled text (and
objects) but this adds to bloat, and makes any reasonable description
of 'Identical rendering' at least twice as complex (one text rendering
description and one - non-text rendering description).

    I guess the point I'm trying to make is that text rendering is one
part of an SVG renderer.  So perhaps FreeType is part of the answer
for Vadim's All-Singing-All-Dancing SVG implementation, but there is a
lot more involved than just text rendering.
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2002 10:52:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:24 GMT