- From: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 16:12:53 +0200
- To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:47:50 +0200, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > On 6/7/10 7:01 AM, Erik Dahlstrom wrote: >> On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:31:51 +0200, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> >> wrote: >> >>> Not quite. They support a subset (or rather multiple incompatible >>> subsets) of SVG Fonts. >> >> In my experience what's defined in SVG Tiny 1.2 for SVG Fonts is quite >> interoperable. > > And the UAs in question support nothing outside SVG Tiny 1.2? Speaking for Opera I know of only one thing, the 'vkern' element. My guess is that that works in Batik too, but I haven't tested. >> And of course there are more implementations that support >> SVG Fonts, e.g Inkscape, Illustrator and various other tools. > > Same question. I'm sure there's documentation available at least for the Adobe products, and freely available sourcecode for the Inkscape and Batik projects. >> Basically I don't think there's ground for the statement about "multiple >> incompatible subsets". > > There sure was last time I tested this stuff; perhaps implementations > have changed since then (narrowed down the scope of what they implement, > or converged on the cases they disagreed on that are outside Tiny 1.2)? > > I'll accept the claim that SVG Tiny 1.2 SVG Fonts are interoperably > implemented in multiple UAs. But the discussion was about SVG 1.1 SVG > Fonts. Fair enough, and SVG 1.2T fonts are a subset of SVG 1.1 fonts so I could just as well have called them SVG 1.1 fonts. I just find it slightly more descriptive to refer to them as SVG Tiny 1.2 fonts. /Erik -- Erik Dahlstrom, Core Technology Developer, Opera Software Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Personal blog: http://my.opera.com/macdev_ed
Received on Monday, 7 June 2010 14:26:33 UTC