- From: Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@enst.fr>
- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 04:00:32 +0200
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- CC: anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au, SVG Working Group WG <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
Hi, Doug Schepers a écrit : > Hi, Guys- > > Nice work on moving the description of bbox to Coords, Anthony. I have > one nit, inlin below... > > Anthony Grasso wrote (on 10/15/08 10:34 AM): >>>> This definition says: >>>> "For curved shapes, the bounding box must enclose all portions of the >>>> shape along the edge, not just end points, but must not include >>>> control points for curves that are not within the shape itself." >>>> The 'must not' requirement should be changed to a 'should' because >>>> depending on the curve and depending on the precision of the >>>> implementation (fixed point), it may be impossible to make a bounding >>>> box that does not include the control point. >>> There was actually a mistake in my comment. The proposed edit is replace: >>> "For curved shapes, the bounding box must enclose all portions of the >>> shape along the edge, not just end points, but must not include >>> control points for curves that are not within the shape itself." >>> with >>> "For curved shapes, the bounding box must enclose all portions of the >>> shape along the edge, not just end points, but should not include >>> control points for curves that are not within the shape itself." >>> >> As per your suggestion the "must not" was changed to "should not". I >> added an additional sentence at the end to help clarify the paragraph: >> "For example, control points of a curve that are at a further distance >> than the curve edge, from the non-enclosing side of the curve edge, must >> be excluded from the bounding box." >> >> Do you think this sentence helps with clarification of the paragraph? > > The passage was indeed ambiguously worded, previously. However, I > thought the new wording was also a bit unclear... the "should not" > wording could be read to indicate that implementations are permitted to > include control points in the bbox if there is a good reason for them to > do so, such as performance. In fact, the exclusion of control point > must remain a must, but the passage needed qualifying remarks. I've > changed it as below [1], and retained Anthony's f'rinstance: > > [[ > For curved shapes, the bounding box must enclose all portions of the > shape along the edge, not just end points. Note that control points for > a curve which are not defined as lying along the line of the resulting > curve (e.g., the second coordinate pair of a Cubic Bézier command) must > not contribute to the dimensions of the bounding box (though those > points may fall within the area of the bounding box, if they lie within > the shape itself, or along or close to the curve). For example, control > points of a curve that are at a further distance than the curve edge, > from the non-enclosing side of the curve edge, must be excluded from the > bounding box. > ]] > > [1] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.2T/publish/coords.html#BoundingBox Reading the new version of the text, I'm fine with it. My only remaining concern is about the bounding box of 'defs' elements. Cyril > > Regards- > -Doug -- Cyril Concolato Maître de Conférences/Associate Professor Groupe Mutimedia/Multimedia Group Département Traitement du Signal et Images /Dept. Signal and Image Processing Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Télécommunications 46 rue Barrault 75 013 Paris, France http://tsi.enst.fr/~concolat
Received on Thursday, 16 October 2008 02:01:14 UTC