Re: Is the px unit equivalent to user units?

Jon,

Thank you. That answers my question and I'm satisfied with the response (the 
raising of an issue with the WG). I look forward to the publishing of an errata 
for Full 1.1, however few items it starts off with.

Thanks again for your response,
Jonathan

Jon Ferraiolo wrote:
> Jonathan,
> Regarding:
> ------------ 
> I can't reconcile it with the sentence 'the size of "1px" may map to a 
> different number of user units on different systems', 
> ------------
> 
> The above sentence from the SVG 1.1 spec is indeed confusing. I am
> pretty sure that the above sentence is a leftover from an early draft of
> SVG 1.0 when a different set of rules were used for CSS units than what
> was ultimately approved for the SVG 1.0 Recommendation.
> 
> The comments in the indented section below about absolute units are
> still true, but the comment about "px" units need to be stricken. I will
> raise an issue with the SVG WG to discuss cleaning up this part of the
> spec.
> 
> Note that the confusing text is not included in the SVG Tiny 1.2 spec;
> thus, if any changes are needed, we are talking about an erratum for
> Full 1.1 and updated language for Full 1.2.
> 
> Jon
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-svg-request@w3.org [mailto:www-svg-request@w3.org] On Behalf
> Of Jonathan Watt
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 11:29 AM
> To: www-svg@w3.org; Jon Ferraiolo
> Subject: Re: Is the px unit equivalent to user units?
> 
> 
> Jon,
> 
> Thank you for the reply. In this instance I'm concerned with SVG 1.1
> Full.
> 
> I've read the text in section 7.10 that you mention, but my point
> continues to 
> be that I can't reconcile it with the sentence 'the size of "1px" may
> map to a 
> different number of user units on different systems', also from section
> 7.10. 
> Here's that sentence in context:
> 
>    Note that use of px units or any other absolute unit identifiers 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; thus, absolute units identifiers are only
>    recommended for the width and the height on outermost 'svg' elements
>    and situations where the content contains no transformations and it
>    is desirable to specify values relative to the device pixel grid or
>    to a particular real world unit size.
> 
> Is this section in error? Either way, yes or no, I would very much
> appreciate 
> that a WG member say so. If it's not in error an explanation as to how
> it can be 
> reconciled with the other text you and I have pointed out would also be
> appreciated.
> 
> Best regards,
> Jonathan
> 
> Jon Ferraiolo wrote:
>> Jonathan,
>>
>> In response to your question:
>> -----------
>> I'm asking is a length of "5px" is always the same as a length of "5"?
>> -----------
>>
>> The anwser depends on whether you are talking about Tiny or Full, and
>> whether you are talking about the width/height attributes on the root
>> 'svg' element or other length values within SVG Full.
>>
>> In SVG Tiny, the only place where "5px" is allowed is on the 'width'
> and
>> height' attributes on the root 'svg' element. Assuming a web browser
>> context, "5px" said that the intrinsic size of the graphic is 5px,
> where
>> the definition of px units is the same as the CSS definition of px
>> units. Thus, if you have an html:object tag, the SVG graphic should
>> appear as the same size on the screen no matter if the html:object
>> specifies "5px" or if it specified nothing but uses the instrinsic
> "5px"
>> from the root 'svg' element.
>>
>> In SVG Full 1.1, CSS absolute units are allowed in many other places
> for
>> length values, but there is a simple algorithm to convert from
> absolute
>> units to user units via a simple multiple operation. Thus, "1px" is
>> equivalent to "1" (i.e., 1 user unit), "1pt" is equivalent to "1.25",
>> and "1in" is equivalent to "90". (See
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/coords.html#Units). The basic idea is that
>> all lengths (except for the intrinsic size from width/height on the
> root
>> 'svg' element) can be quickly converted into user units.
>>
>> (Note: I believe the Tiny 1.2 Last Call draft as it stands is
> confusing
>> in this area. It includes the conversion rules from CSS absolute units
>> to user units within section 7.11, but as far as I know there are no
>> features in Tiny 1.2 that would ever invoke these conversion rules.)
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: www-svg-request@w3.org [mailto:www-svg-request@w3.org] On Behalf
>> Of Jonathan Watt
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 9:47 AM
>> To: www-svg@w3.org; Doug Schepers
>> Subject: Re: Is the px unit equivalent to user units?
>>
>>
>> Doug Schepers wrote:
>>> Hi, Jonathan-
>>>
>>> Jonathan Watt wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> | 'One px unit is defined to be equal to one user unit. Thus, a 
>>> | length of "5px" is the same as a length of "5".' 
>>> [...]
>>> | But a little further on you find the sentence: 'Note that use 
>>> | of px units or any other absolute unit identifiers 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'.
>>> | 
>>> | How can you reconcile these statements? Is the latter 
>>> | statement a mistake, or is there a reason for it? 
>>>
>>> I think that it's a bit of a sticky thing to wrap one's head around.
>> As best
>>> as I can make out, neither statement is not always correct. If you
>> have
>>> specified px units on an element, the size of the device screen in
>>> combination with the initial viewBox and the zoom level will almost
>>> certainly mean that the device pixels are not the actual measurement
>> of the
>>> element's geometry.
>> Sure, that's expected because despite its name the, px unit isn't a
>> measure of 
>> device pixels. It's not what I'm asking though. I'm asking is a length
>> of "5px" 
>> is always the same as a length of "5"?
>>
>>> So, equating user units to pixels (or even using pixels
>>> as a unit) is almost certainly semantically wrong,
>> Well the same applies to all the other units. Anyway, I'm not
> interested
>> in the 
>> semantics right now, I'm only interested in the question I posed at
> the
>> start of 
>> this thread.
>>
>>> and most likely literally
>>> wrong as well.
>> I'd be grateful if the WG could give a concrete answer to my question.
>> As you 
>> know I appreciate you answers, but a "most likely" is not so helpful.
>>
>>> This may be a legacy from CSS's insistence on unit values, or a
>> carryover
>>> from some earlier mechanism or scenario discussed in the SVG WG, but
> I
>> don't
>>> think that they are particularly relevant to the current realities of
>> SVG.
>>
>> If so I'd appreciate a WG member making a statement to the effect that
>> the 
>> latter paragraph is wrong and will be removed at some point.
>>
>>> In fact, I much prefer the way SVG Tiny 1.2 approaches the problem,
> by
>>> moving all unit measurements to the root.
>> Okay, but the question at hand is of pressing importance to make sure
>> the advice 
>> being given today isn't going to give people problems later. In this
>> thread, I'm 
>> not so interested in what might happen in the future with SVG Tiny
> 1.2.
>>> The only place I see this falling
>>> down is in relative units such as percentages, em, and ex, which may
>> still
>>> be useful. I would like to see the 'px' unit deprecated in SVG, in
>> favor of
>>> 'uu' (user units) or 'csu' (coordinate space units).
>> First of all I don't see any point in making px == user units == 
>> uu/csu/whatever. If px is always equal to user units then we have what
>> we need. 
>> px isn't a measure of device pixels.
>>
>> Secondly I think you know my opinion on deprecating things.
>> Implementations 
>> still have to implement whatever you deprecate to be compatible with 
>> pre-existing content, so that isn't a great option.
>>
>>> | Is the advice I'm giving sound or not?
>>>
>>> I would personally prefer the reverse advice, if it's practical.
>> The advice I'm giving is for people to use px for lengths in CSS
>> wherever they 
>> would have omitted a unit (in the belief that px is always equivalent
> to
>> user 
>> units). The opposite advice is not practical because then the CSS is
> in
>> error in 
>> Firefox and I guess in any other future multi-namespace 
>> CSS-supporting-and-conforming UA.
>>
>>> Since SVG
>>> Tiny 1.2 will not allow CSS units, it would be better to advise
> people
>> not
>>> to use CSS at all, except possibly in the case of stylesheets (which
>> you do
>>> state on your page).
>> Thanks for your reply Doug.
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 5 January 2006 01:03:43 UTC