Re: Miterclip and Arcs joins, and the future of SVG 2 generally

Awesome work Skef.  Thank you for doing that.

I have no power myself, but the first step would presumably be to update
266618 with this info.  Then we can hope that we can get some of the
Chromium/Opera/Edge folks here to push it over the line.
Merging this change (and the small changes to implement attribute/CSS
support) will presumably instantly give it the 2+ browser implementations
it needs to lose its "at risk" status.

Paul


On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 06:01, Skef Iterum <github@skef.org> wrote:

> A while back I implemented Miterclip and Arcs joins in FontForge because I
> thought they were a good idea (and I didn't realize at first that they
> weren't implemented much of anywhere else).
>
> And because I thought they were a good idea, and I was familiar with the
> algorithms, I decided to try to get them off the "at risk" list by
> implementing them in Skia and then a browser. Hence, after a large amount
> of work:
>
> https://skia-review.googlesource.com/c/skia/+/303483
>
> It's very hard to defend code quality in words but anyone who wants to
> (and has a machine capable of compiling Skia) can pull this over and run viewer
> --slide StrokeJoins to verify the general lack of "glitches" for
> themselves.
>
> I've now chatted briefly with some of the Skia folks and they say it's
> unlikely they'll review this CR, let alone integrate it, for the expected
> "this isn't coming from the product side" reasons. Code quality is
> therefore not at issue -- it's just an issue of perceived demand.
>
> So, two things:
>
>    1. If anyone is in a position to prompt advocacy for this feature from
>    any group maintaining a browser that uses Skia, now is the time. Opera,
>    maybe? Anyone?
>    2. If no one is in that position it may be time to rethink this part
>    of the standard.
>
> Obviously no one asked me to do this work so the time that I've wasted is
> entirely on me. However, if this is the reality there's a point where
> standards groups need to ask themselves whether what they've specified
> amounts to more than an attractive nuisance (like a pool without a fence).
>
> Skef Iterum
>