- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:41:51 +1100
- To: Stephen Chenney <schenney@chromium.org>
- CC: "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
On 20/12/12 1:59 AM, Stephen Chenney wrote: > It seems that no browser supports arbitrary geometry inside a <glyph> > element. Only path data in the "d" attribute of the glyph is supported, > and then only on Opera and WebKit (as far as I can tell). There are no > W3C tests for non-path glyphs that I could find. > > I propose we drop the container aspect of glyph and insist on path data > only. The complexity of implementing arbitrary geometry inside <glyph> > makes it unlikely to be supported. In my view, we should push forward with the SVG-in-OpenType proposal to satisfy the use case of colourful, animated fonts, and for smaller (one-off) uses of graphics for text, we should introduce a new feature that allows graphics to be associated with a text string. For example, something like: <text> <tspan x="100" y="100">Introducing...</tspan> <tgraphics> <path d="..."/> <g> ... </g> <!-- whatever other arbitrary graphics --> <tspan>Wizbango</tspan> </tgraphics> <tspan x="400" y="300">... the new laundry detergent</tspan> </text> Maybe you would want to allow an x="", y="", horiz-adv-x="", ascent="", descent="" on the <tgraphics>, so that you could select the text nicely. Alternatively, simpler would be to have <tgraphics> as a top level element and not allow it to be inline with regular text content. > I also discovered that it is essential that a horiz-adv-x and related > sizes be given for the font, otherwise the width is undefined. I think > the spec should be explicit about this somewhere in the <glyph> > discussion. Maybe we could also define it such that the advances, if > undefined, come from the bounding box of the path. Or, if you want something simpler, we could default it to whatever units-per-em is.
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2012 02:42:24 UTC