> > [...] , it sounds as if the fonts should be designed as the metric values > from TrueType or CFF glyphs could be used as if they are same for SVG > glyphs. >
THIS! If that's the case, it is going to solve the whole problem I think. :) I have a few OT-SVG fonts, I shall check this tomorrow. B: Calculate the boundingbox without real drawing and without the > considerations on clipping and transparent pixels in raster images. Leave > it to... (ditto) > Hearing Alexei's comment, and looking at the behaviour of > cairo_recording_surface_ink_extents(), some people may think "calculated > boundingbox is sufficiently useful even if does not reflect the clipping or > transparent pixels in raster images, maybe the majority of SVG-OT would not > use such complicated SVG". > C: Measure an "approximate" boundingbox by small-scaled rasterization. If it is too slow to scan 1000 x 1000 pixels to measure the precise > boundingbox of the inked ARGB pixels, it would be acceptable for 128 x 128 > or 64 x 64 bi-level pixels? Yes. I personally don't see any downside to B. Most libraries are providing a function to get this. We can perform a check to see if it's tight or not, which will take 2 * (H + W) pixel checks at max. Don't know whether this will be considered `slow' or not. If not tight, maybe we can use C to get an approximate one. > Sorry Moazin, I understand yet I've not responded the question raised by > you, I need more time to consider them... > It's totally fine. You've already helped me a lot and I am very thankful for that! :)
_______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
