W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Clarification on getBBox() with shapes of zero width

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 06:09:52 -0700
To: Robert Longson <longsonr@gmail.com>
CC: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>, Philip Rogers <pdr@google.com>, Rick <graham.rick@gmail.com>, "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>, "jackalmage@gmail.com" <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E6321736-E415-4382-A96A-54B7961FEC3F@adobe.com>

On Aug 9, 2012, at 4:37 AM, "Robert Longson" <longsonr@gmail.com> wrote:

>> getBBox() "Returns the tight bounding box in current user space"
>> therefore is independent of any rasterizers, Cairo or anything like that.
> Getting the bounding box of a path with cubic/quadratic besziers is
> non-trivial. Cairo does this for us.

More important is rect, circle, ellipse. At webkit we learned to do simple math without the graphic library. Especially Cairo graphics used to be not very fast.
I am not so sure about path so. Even if it should give the bbox as well, it might be difficult on webkit as well.

>> Robert, I very much doubt the code in FF is reaching down into Cairo
>> to get the boudning box unless you are doing some weird reverse transform
>> that I did at one time and found it couldn't follow the getBBox implementation
>> rules and tests.
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/layout/svg/base/src/nsSVGPathGeometryFrame.cpp#354.

>> So no doubt (0,100) is correct.
>> Similarly, display:none has no effect on the user space co-ordinate system
>> and should return the same values.
> If you want this included then set the visibility to hidden. Its very
> hard for Firefox to meet the svg specification requirements on
> display:none as we're constrained by html implementation performance
> e.g. having things such as markers render when they are set to
> display:none.

Same occurs to webkit. We would not support it for display:none. Looks like ie has problems with it as well.

>> Philip is correct, Opera is the only implementation in the tested group
>> that does the correct thing.
>> Returning a value of (0,0) for display:none is wrong - the calculation
>> should be done in user space where the element exists and whether it
>> gets rendered or not is immaterial in regard to its actual geometry.
> I suspect we'll just continue to be wrong then in what to me, are edge
> cases which can be worked around by authors anyway .

At least for display:none the same occurs to webkit. And possibly ie.


> Best regards
> Robert.
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2012 13:09:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:29 UTC