- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:20:32 -0700
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- CC: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Hi John, On 23/10/11 9:15 PM, John Daggett wrote: > I have to strongly agree with Rik here, I think being able to retrieve > individual unhinted glyph outlines along with positions would be far > more useful in general. > > Text-to-path implementation is just plain hard. I've personally seen > engineers obsess over this feature and all the difficult problems > associated with it. The real problem is that it's hard to define in such > a way that implementations will be consistent and consistent in a way > that designers will prefer. When text is distorted like this, designers > invariably want to tweak the placement. So the question becomes not > what the "ideal" rendering is but what's the best way to provide hooks > that allow a designer to easily specify what's ideal *for them*. Having > an simple API that provides a set of outlines and positions seems a far better > way of satisfying that need. Are you talking about text-to-path like SVG's <textPath>, or text-to-outlines? The proposal is just about the latter, so that effects beyond what SVG defines for <textPath> can be achieved through script. My thinking is just that if the implementation already has to perform text-on-a-path due to <textPath>, then I don't see why I shouldn't be able to get the path output from that as well as for regular on-a-line text. For example if I had <text>abc def</text> <text>ghi <textPath d="...">jkl</textPath> mno</text> I wouldn't want to unnecessarily restrict the API so that it could return outline paths for the first <text> elements but not for the second. I agree that getting the outlines for <textPath> affected text isn't as useful for my use case here, so if there are indeed good reasons for leaving that out, I can live with that.
Received on Monday, 24 October 2011 22:21:31 UTC