- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:40:47 +0200
- To: T Rowley <tor@cs.brown.edu>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Thursday, May 19, 2005, 3:02:48 AM, Tor wrote: TR> 10.2 TR> "It is possible to apply a gradient to text. ... object bounding box TR> units are computed relative to the entire 'test' element in all cases..." TR> Why have text behave different that other geometry (11.12)? It doesn't. For example, if I have a path element which has multiple subpaths that trace out disjoint shapes, then a gradient with gradientUnits=objectBoundingBox is computed relative to the entire path element. Similarly with text, the bounding box is the entire text element. We noted that occasionally, implementors would put the gradient on each individual character, and therefore added this warning note. TR> 10.6.1 TR> "Many of the features here go beyond the functionality provided by the TR> elements in this profile..." TR> This "tiny" specification is almost 400 pages - leave out verbarge not TR> associated with the specification in question. OK. We reviewed it, and in fact 'many' overstates the case. There were some things relative to vertical text, that we have since removed. in some cases though , its easier to give a more general description, place limitations on it for Tiny, and lift those limitations in full than it is to describe what Tiny does and then state that Full has an entirely different model. TR> 10.11 TR> <textArea> needs an example or two. Yes it does, I have an action item to produce some examples. TR> 10.11.1 TR> "For cases where box model layout is required, it is suggest that a TR> 'foreignObject'..." TR> Section 10.1 says that "the exact semantics of this approach are not TR> completely defined." Right. So for example a foreignObject could also be used for something that uses a non-box model (like MathML which uses struts and springs, or X3D which uses a 3D coordinate system). So, its not trying to say that foreignObject always produces a box model. Rather, its saying that if you want some layout model other than the SVG one, for elements not in the SVG namespace, then use a foreignObject. Having a foreignObject point to XHTML with a CSS style sheet would, for visual media, give a box model. TR> 10.11.1 TR> "The layout of wrapped text is user agent dependent..." TR> Not good for interoperability, especially in light of having SVG defined TR> fonts. That is what we thought too, and the previous draft tried hard to make this not be user agent defined. However, there are cases where it will be - for example, the tesselation of a curve into straight line segments will be implementation dependent and could easily have differences of 1/100th of a pixel between implementations. such differences, while hardly affecting the appearance of eachglyph, could affect whether a given glyph intersects the side bound of a wrapped text area or not. More seriously, the I18N group told us that the previous approach precluded good but user-agent dependent layout for some languages 9eg Thai, which does word breaking based on a dictionary. The size and content of a Thai dictionary is outside the scope of the SVG spec. So currently we have the default layout be user agent dependent - thatgets youtext which wraps, for example in a call-out box on a diagram, but does not get you reproducibility. And we have a mode which uses the algorithm in the spec, which gives you more reproducibility (eg for more graphics intensive material) but may look awkward for certain languages. TR> Perhaps a "wrapping = auto | exact" attribute is needed, in the TR> same fashion that textPath in SVG full has a spacing attribute? Yes, exactly. TR> 10.12 TR> It seems one of the natural uses that editable text fields might be put TR> to is input fields, but there seems to be no way to control the "width" TR> of a field or clip over-long content (as SVGT lacks both <clipPath> and TR> nested <svg>). If wrapped text does not fit in the space, the remaining portion it is not layed out. So it does not appear, but also since it does not generate geometry, it does not need to be clipped. TR> 10.12.1 TR> "For WYSIWYG editing the following..." TR> What should happen if current point is moved to an area not visible TR> (overlapping geometry, text running outside the outer <svg>, etc)? On your last point, we are looking at rewording where the cursor position is defined in terms of a logical position in the backing store rather than an on-screen cursor position. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Monday, 22 August 2005 07:04:28 UTC