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

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

From: Thomas E Deweese <thomas.deweese@kodak.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 11:07:39 -0500
Message-ID: <15835.45899.357272.993654@frog.rl.kodak.com>
To: Vadim Plessky <plessky@cnt.ru>
Cc: Thomas E Deweese <thomas.deweese@kodak.com>, www-svg@w3.org

>>>>> "VP" == Vadim Plessky <plessky@cnt.ru> writes:

VP> In a short: I stopped using TTF fonts about year ago, and
VP> actively promote usage of PostScript Type1 (or Type2/CFF)
VP> fonts.

VP> On Wednesday 20 November 2002 5:11 pm, Thomas E Deweese wrote: 
> Any particular reason why?

VP> Here they are: 

    [...] 

VP> Hope this helps!..

    Yup, of course PostScript(tm) is totally free of problems either :)

VP> | | >> But thanks for this reference, may be one day I would
VP> install Batik | >> and try this.  Does it convert TrueType hints
VP> (opcodes) to SVG, | >> too?  | | 

> SVG fonts have no notion of font hinting. None - zip - zilch -
> zero.  Yes, it is clear that this makes them almost useless for
> small font sizes.  On the up side most SVG viewers do use
> anti-aliasing for rendering text, while this certainly does not
> solve the problem it helps.  

> I don't think the SVG WG is likely to add font hinting to SVG fonts
> - my impression is that one must step very carefully here to avoid
> a minefield of patents.

VP> I had impression that there is an understanding of HStem and Vstem
VP> in W3C standards (at least it's in CSS3).  And someone told me
VP> that SVG fonts canbe hinted in Adobe's PS model (Adobe CFF format,
VP> or Type2 fonts)

    The Adobe viewer allows you to embed some fonts in the SVG file (I
think they use OpenType?).  However, there is no conformance criteria
on SVG viewers to read and understand any of these other font formats.
'SVG Fonts' meaning fonts defined in XML using SVG, currently have no
notion of hinting.

    I'll go take a look at what CSS3 is doing with HStem and VStem.

VP> There are lots of 'art' fonts that would look _much_ better if 
VP> they could use color.  You could then have real 'illuminated'
VP> fonts, etc.

VP> I think 3D (in particular, OpenGL) is much better for *illuminated
VP> objects*, etc.  Apple recently introduced Quartz Extreme, which
VP> combines Display PDF and OpenGL API.  Sounds interesting, IMO.

    Given your interest in high quality rendering I would think you
would want to stay away from OpenGL.  In Quartz Extreme they do do
lots of really cool stuff with OpenGL, however most vector rendering
is not done using OpenGL as the anti-aliasing was not very high
quality.

VP> Just so it is clear SVG isn't aiming to replace HTML - where text
VP> is king, it is trying to provide a format where vector graphics
VP> and text and raster images play a more balanced role.

VP> But SVG can be used as *final distribution* format for documents,
VP> no?  I SVG can replace closed PDF at some moment.  What we need
VP> for this is good, fast SVG renderer, and necessary support for
VP> printers (drivers).  I can think CUPS can be a good start for
VP> this.  We just need replace PS with SVG, and GhostScript with good
VP> SVG renderer.

    Well, SVG can be used in a large number of places and this is
certainly one of them.  You should take a look at Batik it is
currently the most conformant SVG renderer available (unfortunately
for you it does not do font hinting at all).  But it is certainly
capable of taking the place of a tool like GhostScript (who's font
rendering is generally much worse than Batik's - IMHO).
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2002 11:07:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:23 GMT