- From: Vincent Hardy <vincent.hardy@sun.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:31:38 +0100
- To: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Hello Tobias, Tobias Reif wrote: > Hi Vincent, > > >>> [...] >>> Two issues I found with Squiggles rendering quality: >>> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14673 >> >> >> This shows that Batik does not do as well with >> text-rendering=optimizeGeometricPrecision. In Batik, that turns off >> anti-aliasing and the text does not look as good becauce we do not do >> hinting. This is a known limitiation. > > > > ... of "..."? If it's a limitation of Squiggle, then the bug report is > relevant. > I was explaining what we are doing. Hinting would be a better solution but does that mean it is a bug? > >>> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12013 >>> >> You point out to several differences between ASV and Batik, but it is >> unclear to me what is 'right'. For example, the feather is jagged >> indeed (i.e., the path has lots of control points that do not describe >> a smooth curve). > > > > I see. > >> So I am not convinced Batik is not doing anything bad there. > > > > Me neither; it just doesn't look as pretty, and what's more important, > shows that different viewers render the SVG differently. > > So the issues are not to be dismissed as irrelevant, I do not think what you are saying is irrelevant and I was not trying to dismiss you comment. You filed a bug against Batik and I was pointing out that I do not consider the difference in behavior to be necessaraly a bug. I did not say that the fact there is a difference is irrelevant. > but are to be > solved; if not in Batik, then in the spec. > 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 :) > I thought it helped the discussion to explain what we are doing (or not doing in that case). Before proposing a solution, I think it is important to understand the problem clearly and why we may have differences. > 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. > > Sorry if I'm drastic this morning, but I want to express that it helps > SVG if stuff like this gets resolved, in some way. > I agree with you and I like the "be strict to be cool" approach (quoting Karl from the W3C QA team). This said, it is an area where it is really hard to find a proper way of specifying accuracy. The reason I brought up curve simplification is that I thought the rendering difference could come from a viewer simplifying the path depending on zoom ratio. Vincent.
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2002 08:35:58 UTC