https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125349
Armin Le Grand <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |ACCEPTED CC| |[email protected] Assignee|[email protected] |[email protected] |g | Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Armin Le Grand <[email protected]> --- The scenario involves two cascading clip regions defined in the primitive set that gets produced. This in principle no problem - the visualization shows that these regions are perfectly well defined. The 1st clip region is needed for the svg itself, because content shows outside the svg bounds (this is detected in the svg importer). The 2nd clip region is used to give the gradient fill it's shape (shape as clip region, content renders e.g. a rectangular gradient) When the primitive content needs to be converted to metafile the situation gets different: Metafiles only know one clip region at a time. Thus, when one is already set and a 2nd one is to be set, a merged clip region needs to be created, the logical AND of both. This is a complicated action which normally runs well in basegfx polyPolygons, but still has some numerical problems sometimes. In https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125300 I already did some optimizations for the clipping - for the same reason. It shows that this task (and the involved chrome.svg example) have the same reason. In issue 125300 I solved this in the MetafileRenderer, but the better solution is to solve it in the clipping code in basegfx itself. The first (not too expensive) step ist to detect special cases if one of the polyPolygons involved is indeed a rectangle. If so, a much simpler, cheaper and numerically more stable path can be taken. Even simpler if both are rectangles. Grepping, added code to basegfx, removing code from issue 125300 and doing some tests... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the issue. You are watching all issue changes.
