Re: SVG text wrapping (was: minutes, Tokyo 2013 SVG F2F Day 2, 4 June 2013)

Hi, Brian-

On 6/6/13 8:34 PM, Brian Birtles wrote:
> (2013/06/06 23:08), Doug Schepers wrote:
>
>> I've now clarified my proposal on this point (see "Positioning (x and
>> y)"):
>>   http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Proposals/Wrapping_Text
>
> That looks much better than what I was imagining.

Glad I could clear that up.


>> However, I agree with Cameron that empowering authors to explicitly set
>> the y-origin to align to the top of the rendering area is a good idea,
>> and alignment-baseline:top will let them do that (as I mention in the
>> updated proposal).
>
> Yes, I think that's reasonable.

Good.


>> I proposed <textshape> for SVG Tiny 1.2, but alas, my feedback came too
>> late for existing implementations.
>>
>> I still maintain that allowing authors to specify a width for <text> is
>> more intuitive and has a better fallback than a new dedicated element,
>> and I don't think it results in behavior any more confusing than any
>> other property that changes the text positioning... for example,
>> alignment-baseline or text-anchor.
>
> I think it's ok given that it's backwards compatible. If authors are
> repeatedly writing:
>
>    <text style="alignment-baseline:text-before-edge; width: 100px" y="10">
>
> we could investigate adding another element that is a shorthand for the
> above.

I'm loathe to add another element, to be honest. I think most authors 
will write that once, in a stylesheet, for all text elements, or for 
ones with a certain class, and it will be pretty simple.

But let's see how it's used in practice, and what authors say.


> One question while I'm at it, in the proposal you consistently use x/y
> attributes but width/height within a style attribute. Are you suggesting
> width/height *not* be presentation attributes but only properties?

I think it makes sense to allow attributes or properties (especially as 
we're blurring those lines in SVG 2). I wrote it that way to be sorta 
familiar to people who either know SVG or who know CSS, and also because 
Cameron's prototype only allows the 'width' property, not the attributes 
(so my examples would have the best chance of working in his prototype). 
I think in practice, the conventions of attribute or property would be 
interchangeable, as the author prefers.


>> Brian, does this address your concerns? Do you still have worries about
>> this proposal?
>
> Yes it address my concerns. I mistook the description of the prototype
> for a description of the proposal.

Cool. Thanks for giving me the impetus to clarify that point, since I 
suspect some other people were confused by it.

Regards-
-Doug

Received on Friday, 7 June 2013 00:47:36 UTC