On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 04:50 pm, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> I see absolutely no problem with creating that special class that
> holds all the information about the setup for the new coordinate
> system established by a viewport. You could argue that the CTM is
> calculated too early in the layout managers. So far all renderers
> were pretty much ok with only working with the CTM. If that doesn't
> apply to all renderers we have to adjust for that.

What I don't quite get is why both of you talk about a new class. The 
spec defines all the necessary traits required. What is the argument 
against simply adding these traits to the area tree? Given that 
Viewports are not appearing very often in the area tree (compared to 
line, text, block, space,...) adding a few additional traits shouldn't 
be a size/space problem.

BTW, so far we only have 3 renderers using the CTM (PDF, PS and Java2D). 
It remains to be seen if other renderers currently in the sandbox (mif, 
pcl, svg) can live with it or require the base properties from which 
the CTM was calculated.

> On 18.12.2005 17:42:01 Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
> > On Dec 18, 2005, at 14:52, Manuel Mall wrote:
> >
> > Hi Manuel,
> >
> > > <snip />
> > > I think this needs improvement but what is the best strategy
> > > here?
> >
> > I just had an --admittedly very vague-- idea about this, don't know
> > if it is feasible. Jeremias, correct me if I'm wrong...
> >
> > What about creating an object type, especially meant for use with
> > the render-type AFP, that stores the needed info? Something like a
> > mapping from 'viewport with id'->'reference-orientation' (maybe
> > only for orientation other than zero). That way, you wouldn't need
> > to reverse engineer the values from the CTM. In fact, the AFP
> > renderer could bypass the CTM completely and get the relevant data
> > from somewhere else without having to perform recalculation.
> >
> > Not really sure about the how, when or where, though... As I said,
> > very vague.
> >
> > Just a thought. Hope it can be of use.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Andreas
> Jeremias Maerki


Reply via email to