RE: SVG Meeting minutes 2013/06/27

On 2013-06-27 Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
> Should text-overflow apply to text-on-path?
> 
>    Tav: it only apply to regular text for now
> 
>    . we discussed this but I don't remember
> 
>    . if we concluded anything
> 
>    ed: opera just treated it on the text element but it works on a
>    text path
> 
>    . because we wrap the text-path
> 
>    krit: what happens with overflow in text
> 
>    <ed>
>    [16]http://dahlström.net/svg/css/text-overflow-ellipsis.svg
> 
>      [16] http://dahlstr/
> 
>    . we discussed this before and decided that it was difficult to
>    definee
> 
>    ed: we'd have to go back and special case it
> 
>    . so it basically worked but it's possible that it wasn't great
>    in all cases
> 
>    . you layout the text on a straight line first and then map it
>    to a path
> 
>    . at least that's how opera did it
> 
>    . it's not ideal in all cases. for instance if it's not one
>    line
> 
>    Tav: that's what you'd want
> 
>    . maybe the order of the agenda items is reversed :-)
> 
>    . the next item talks about what width means

I suppose this is related to my suggestion to allow overflowing text on path
(render it outside the 0-100% range):
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2013Feb/0060.html

In this discussion we were faced with the problem of unknown trajectory
outside the range so we suggested to enable it just for closed (sub)paths.

The conclusion was: The text anchor is finally attached to some point on the
path. It is either simple path or one of subpaths. The rule could be
generalized that this 'path item' must be closed.

Only in that case overflowing would be applicable as we can determine the
complete trajectory required for rendering the whole text.

Something like this is missing to me for texts on circles as stated in my
original post.

Thanks for reconsideration,

Jan

Received on Sunday, 30 June 2013 18:11:06 UTC