- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 16:15:04 +0200
- To: George Williams <gww@silcom.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Tuesday, August 19, 2003, 2:08:08 AM, George wrote: GW> The SVG 1.1 specification does not say exactly how "relative" should be GW> interpreted in specifying curved splines. GW> M x0 y0 c x1 y1 x2 y2 x3 y3 GW> I have been used to reading PostScript Type1 fonts and I mistakenly GW> assumed this corresponded to GW> M x0 y0 C x1+x0 y1+y0 x2+x1+x0 y2+y1+y0 x3+x2+x1+x0 y3+y2+y1+y0 GW> (the type1 rrcurveto operator where each point is relative to the GW> previous point rather than having them all relative to the initial GW> point. GW> If you could add a statement to the effect that all points are relative GW> to the initial point it would make the lives of people like me easier GW> :-) Yes, we can certainly add that clarification. It seemed obvious at the time but as you correctly point out, there are other possible interpretations that are equally obvious to different communities. All path command can have a 'current point' and end up by creating a new 'current point' for the next command in the path, which is why our formulation of elliptical arcs is so weird. GW> Thanks, GW> George Williams GW> PfaEdit http://pfaedit.sf.net/ Might PFA Edit grow intoa tool for directly creating SVG fonts? -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Friday, 22 August 2003 15:54:58 UTC