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

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

From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:28:19 +0100
Message-ID: <3DDCD163.7060508@pinkjuice.com>
To: www-svg@w3.org

Vadim Plessky wrote:

 > |  If both viewers conform to the 1.0 spec, then 1.2 needs to be
 > |  clearer
 > |  and more detailed, so that we get [subj], without the "?".
 > |
 > |  Perhaps the spec needs to go to go down to the level of
 > |  anti-aliasing
 > |  etc algorithms etc.
 > |
 > |  > We
 > |  > do not smooth curves before rendering.
 > |
 > |  I'm much more interested in a solution than in an explanation :)
 >
 > You want good rendering for text?
 > Than pick up latest FreeType release (2.1.3)

No, I don't just want a good viewer. I want consistent, best identical 
rendering *across* implementations. I expressed above that I think the 
spec needs to be clearer.

 > |  I don't know if ASV and CSV do "smoothing", but the text (bash etc)
 > |  also
 > |  doesn't look as pretty, as I describe.
 > |
 > |  The curves of the feather are so jagged in Batik, that if that is
 > |  conformant rendering *and* if the rendering behaviour of ASV and
 > |  CSV are
 > |  also conformant, there is a grey area in the spec where too much
 > |  difference in rendering behaviour is allowed, which results in very
 > |  relevant rendering differences, which means lower quality, less
 > |  predictability, thus less usefulness of SVG itself.
 >
 > What examples do you use for comparision?

URLs of the SVG and screnshots, and lists of the used viewers all can be 
found at the bug report pages. (ASV = Adobe SVG Viewer, CSV = Corel ...)

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14673
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12013

Tobi


-- 
http://www.pinkjuice.com/
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2002 07:28:20 GMT

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