- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:17:02 +1200
- To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Cc: Vincent Hardy <vhardy@adobe.com>, "public-svg-wg@w3.org" <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
Glenn Adams: > However, I wonder how an SVG UA knows that I have already done the character > to glyph mapping process and that it should not treat this <text/> as > characters to undergo the same processing I have just completed? I think that is what <altGlyph> is for – you specify which particular glyphs you want to render for a sequence of characters. > My sense is that SVG should have two distinct elements, one for use in > drawing a sequence of glyphs, another for use in drawing a sequence of > characters (with implied mapping to glyphs). Using <text/> for both purposes > seems problematic. I don’t think it is necessarily problematic that <altGlyph> is a child of <text> rather than a separate standalone element. The x="" referencing characters rather than glyphs is a problem, though. If we are to introduce a mechanism to specify the mapping of characters to glyphs, it seems like we should have this on <altGlyph>. x="" can remain a character index for <text>, since the author cannot be sure how the characters are going to be mapped to glyphs by the implementation. -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2011 22:17:36 UTC