- From: Jon Ferraiolo <jferraio@Adobe.COM>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:00:38 -0700
- To: David Turner <david.turner@freetype.org>
- Cc: Jon Ferraiolo <jferraio@Adobe.COM>, Wendell Piez <wapiez@mulberrytech.com>, www-svg@w3.org
At 07:43 PM 6/27/01 +0200, David Turner wrote: >Hello, > > > > > 1) On the outermost 'svg' element, you can define the instrinsic > > width/height of the graphic in "px" units. In this use case, a "px" is > > generally an system-dependent unit of measure. On many systems, a "px" will > > map to one device pixel, and different devices have different resolutions, > > so "px" might cause different sizes rendering on different systems. Also, > > on very high-res monitors or on printers, a "px" might be an abstract > > measurement typically in the range of 1/72 to 1/120 inch, again possibly > > causes different rendering sizes on different systems. > > > > This case is the reason for the words: "...use of px units ... can cause > > inconsistent visual results on different viewing environments since the > > size of '1px' may map to a different number of user units on different > > systems..." But now that you bring this up, I think some additional > > rewording may be warranted. > > > > 2) Otherwise, "A px unit and a user unit are defined to be equivalent > in SVG." > > >The following makes me wonder. Isn't it simpler to say that: > > A - a "px" is always equal to a user unit > > B - the initial/outermost viewport transform should typically > map 1 user unit to 1 screen pixels (with variation for > printers, etc..) > >It seems to me that what's currently happening.. > >Comments ? Yes, that is pretty much what's happening most of the time today.It might be appropriate for more careful phrasing within the specification itself. Jon Ferraiolo >- David Turner
Received on Wednesday, 27 June 2001 14:16:10 UTC