- From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:28:19 +0100
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Vadim Plessky wrote: > | If both viewers conform to the 1.0 spec, then 1.2 needs to be > | clearer > | and more detailed, so that we get [subj], without the "?". > | > | Perhaps the spec needs to go to go down to the level of > | anti-aliasing > | etc algorithms etc. > | > | > We > | > do not smooth curves before rendering. > | > | I'm much more interested in a solution than in an explanation :) > > You want good rendering for text? > Than pick up latest FreeType release (2.1.3) No, I don't just want a good viewer. I want consistent, best identical rendering *across* implementations. I expressed above that I think the spec needs to be clearer. > | I don't know if ASV and CSV do "smoothing", but the text (bash etc) > | also > | doesn't look as pretty, as I describe. > | > | The curves of the feather are so jagged in Batik, that if that is > | conformant rendering *and* if the rendering behaviour of ASV and > | CSV are > | also conformant, there is a grey area in the spec where too much > | difference in rendering behaviour is allowed, which results in very > | relevant rendering differences, which means lower quality, less > | predictability, thus less usefulness of SVG itself. > > What examples do you use for comparision? URLs of the SVG and screnshots, and lists of the used viewers all can be found at the bug report pages. (ASV = Adobe SVG Viewer, CSV = Corel ...) http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14673 http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12013 Tobi -- http://www.pinkjuice.com/
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2002 07:28:20 UTC