Hi Thomas,
we just discussed this problem and would like to know a bit more on it:
For #1 I think it is reasonable and desirable for the WG to
define this. The impact on implementations will likely be minimal
as most rendering engines end up mapping the primitives to general
paths (perhaps just polygons) at some point before rendering.
yes, thats what we want to do.
For #2 I think it is much less important and less desirable
for the WG to define. Most implementations don't control the
stroking alg. Stroking alg are very complex and I worry that in
cases where the stroke is wide enough for stroked 'sub paths' to
intersect an implementation would rendering slowly and incorrectly
(the stroke would be double opaque in the overlap region).
My personal feeling is that the Spec should leave most of
the aspects of stroking to implementations. When the
stroke becomes significantly more than a "dotted line" I think
authors should switch from stroke to explicit geometry if they
are concerned about uniform rendering...
thats what we decided for now. At least for now in the tiny version
we'll leave it to the UA. I also agree that it probably wouldn't matter
for many cases.
Rect:
A couple of comments on this.
1) The shape described is really a hole (the area of the shape
is negative, given the SVG coordinate system). It should
go counter clock wise.
can you explain why this is important here? Does the direction matter
for basic shapes?
2) There should be some text allowing the elliptical arcs
to be omitted when r="0" otherwise an implementation would
be forced to place 'double markers' in the corners of a rect.
Probably similar text for when rx >= w/2 and/or ry >= h/2.
good point. Will be added.
3) Finally I would like the definition to start with an elliptical
arc (if needed) so it can end with a 'z' rather than an arc-to
that 'hopefully' matches the start.
It is also worth noting that w/o explicit mention of the 'z'
the path is _not_ closed and hence end-capping should take
place (also angle calculations for markers are affected).
good point, will be added.
--
Circle:
1) This is also has negative area.
same question: why is it important? people think it is natural to do it
clockwise. Same question applies for ellipse.
2) It's start point is different from a rect with
Thank you for your feedback on this,
Andreas
--
----------------------------------------------
Andreas Neumann
Institute of Cartography
ETH Zurich
Wolfgang-Paulistrasse 15
CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland
Phone: ++41-44-633 3031, Fax: ++41-44-633 1153
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www: http://www.carto.net/neumann/
SVG.Open: http://www.svgopen.org/
Carto.net: http://www.carto.net/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
