W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > April 2009

Re: pattern and rendering order

From: Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:42:37 +0200
To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>, www-svg@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.usuaxbctgqiacl@gnorps.linkoping.osa>
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:55:26 +0200, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hello www-svg,
>
> trying to use SVG1.1 pattern I found an interesting question
> for the situation with overflow="visible". I think, this is not
> really specified in the current specification, however the
> problem can be solved as discussed below.

Right, the behaviour in such a case isn't specified currently.

> And if this is clarified, maybe there is a chance, that some
> viewers support this interesting feature correctly and with
> a proper quality, because it turned out in my tests, that
> even in simple situations the results from viewers are
> typically disappointing or not usable due to a low quality
> of presentation.
> In many or most viewers pattern are ignored, wrong or of low
> quality or overflow="visible" is ignored. Low quality looks often
> like enlarged raster images with inaccurate positioning
> (see for example the adobe plugin or Opera; with the adobe
> plugin there are often ugly residual frames from clipping too).
>
> For example Squiggle/Batik uses a method that one copy overlaps
> another - topmost is bottom right, however, this is not specified and
> often not very useful and maybe not intended.

What are the use-cases for wanting to do overflow="visible" on a pattern tile?
Are there any of those use-cases that cannot be solved by editing the pattern tile so that it fits inside the defined viewport?

Cheers
/Erik

-- 
Erik Dahlstrom, Core Technology Developer, Opera Software
Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
Personal blog: http://my.opera.com/macdev_ed
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2009 12:42:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:42 GMT