| Newsgroups |
gmane.text.xml.svg.devel |
| Message-ID |
<[email protected]> |
Hi David,
Absolutely, the variable stroke width should be controlled by a function. A whole set of parameters could be defined, much like filters. Curve controlling a curve = parametric equalizer. In the precise case of calligraphy (the most demanding?) you could consider, given a certain type and size of pen nib: direction, angle, inclination, ascending, descending, curve amplitude, extrema, etc. For example a path will be thinner on vertical strokes and fatter on horizontal strokes, or vice versa, depending on nib (or stiff brush) orientation. In practice you should be able to define a path (with stroke width of 1) and set the parameters, or, enter text (defining more parameters). Quantification parameters (with the possibility of a random factor) should be also available to add the “casual” touch. You should also be able to define splines for variable speed.
I know that some scientists out there can do this in their sleep (specifying), and it’s probably already done in other domains (I’d be surprised if the military don’t have it).
If text can be drawn and animated along a path, there’s no reason why a pen or brush couldn’t. And sure, you should be able to have a certain amount of declarative control, just like for filters.
> I may repost the link in another message since many will not burrow so deeply in this particular thread. I have a tendency toward long-windedness I am told.
If you feel you should be more concise is one thing, but if you must say half of what you have to say just to cope with the fact that readers have grown to only be able to read part of what they’re supposed to read, then we have a problem. A few days ago I posted here recommendations for the young public on reading.
Domenico