Re: Unified draft of SVG-in-OT

Because you need to define the behavior up front and ensure that it's consistent. You can't have it being clipped in one case and not in another – that would produce inconsistent renderings  of the same glyph.

I am trying to ensure that these extensions to OT are usable in non-web-based environments.   This is one of those places where it is important to set "boundaries" on what could potentially be done in order to guarantee that usage.

Leonard

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org<mailto:robert@ocallahan.org>>
Reply-To: "robert@ocallahan.org<mailto:robert@ocallahan.org>" <robert@ocallahan.org<mailto:robert@ocallahan.org>>
Date: Friday, July 26, 2013 11:22 AM
To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>>
Cc: Nikos Andronikos <nikos.andronikos@cisra.canon.com.au<mailto:nikos.andronikos@cisra.canon.com.au>>, "public-svgopentype@w3.org<mailto:public-svgopentype@w3.org>" <public-svgopentype@w3.org<mailto:public-svgopentype@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Unified draft of SVG-in-OT

On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 3:18 AM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote:
So you're suggesting that it's OK for a single glyph to be able to draw ANYWHERE on the page/canvas?!?!    Sorry, but that's "crazy talk" (<grin/>).

I recall a conversation with a colleague 25 years ago where we had a similar argument.

Bottom line: "It's my window and you can't draw on it".

If the caller wants to clip glyph drawing to a particular rectangle, I assume they can do so using whatever 2D drawing API they use.

I don't really understand this conversation.

Rob
--
Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp  waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w