Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG profile is not trivial

Doug Royer <douglasroyer@gmail.com> Tue, 21 January 2020 05:02 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67999120024 for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kXhWAegU1HDl for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 810BF120046 for <rfc-interest-archive-eekabaiReiB1@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5449CF40737; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D50F6F40737 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ASd4a7aGZjfy for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-xd31.google.com (mail-io1-xd31.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d31]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DE83F40711 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-xd31.google.com with SMTP id c16so1470555ioh.6 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:subject:to:references:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xWyhfwK7Wc8ib1aPBlxbDgpK1Rl04hskuaud0TP3SCc=; b=mHWQoonC+6xNHirfovuZQCN9p6goCs/JRE3AU7aJnkKA6s7Cp3OfJyK1pOREkkINCO RuiwQzt5e3j6SVSVvr8ezxZB+QUH1FQscpr6ggq65HU6olxAVxfJ6C+nuN2nWNMRAd2Y 5ZV2g/AHMt2HFnM0opVF5qW//obmBjfF/+ny9f4BOByiRjsE9oEPUCnIFlNqKWeR1pJH X7QQG/JkOGQ77VTaXmqnM0JX0F36KDIKMbptSGqXbG7AlbYpO6JyyEjUygC6vjyxi4gO axHu9YA5V41XszIe2W7cMzNMG1AxnK53SqYJN6yxYB7FMkNRhpTsWT9wuljb5LgYXcfe vctA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:subject:to:references:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xWyhfwK7Wc8ib1aPBlxbDgpK1Rl04hskuaud0TP3SCc=; b=UMdaaIQowsXepLI9sEAPJr7JEfPOoyjrE96UUvI9FAR/5ciRRjTy691N4xWrtIaYpj +muQcDV/5J/mVZoGjgeaJCgwNzF1oSlc3nIdqjV6T6HSWCDaz0uXUTpP9WWtquw9wiqk AZeP9GiflcsZ6xqWYw2KxuPEycYe0OtxUbZ9bHPmxZ2gxQqiKM1frTxAnHj8WrsmT/4n sV1de/sG5x7SB6XBu/d8mo0lXNEdNBu11u/uW7y2DD0kq86WMRbXvs0iiQFbfd2CbKrO DfxB+GXVwJ6kMjQ1PSvCy6V3Nco5RCTxd8QPE+7IcMuhdM5OlHirsJJHnA6aGsHxf/69 XGWQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVEeyBTWSgbr7vsQ5Jv2ycXr6C5z7/GPUgWOZsYyRKHpEf72ZwV FMJ+E7xCD5W7Gl8OzB+yGlQoFibrVf/iwlU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxhQNebDbW62JnrMeWpSyuqbOTMK39jK9cNeFjwA96HqPPbkwkfh3+CGfz7DTehP7dQJrdegQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:d903:: with SMTP id r3mr1806342ioc.293.1579582957988; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.7] ([174.27.20.133]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id w7sm7792243iot.81.2020.01.20.21.02.37 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:02:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Doug Royer <douglasroyer@gmail.com>
X-Google-Original-From: Doug Royer <DouglasRoyer@gmail.com>
To: RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
References: <CAMm+LwiXhhJO7qYi41+DC4W7uMUVipXqyq75Fq2vagA1ppJNdA@mail.gmail.com> <10cca93f-a8b8-4c42-0653-3b12fa67ad12@gmail.com> <CAMm+LwgA-1UffBfrH-Y3J6pfh7ni9kNrndp=gHNyUyi5j=oLxg@mail.gmail.com> <53607da4-6608-783b-b875-65551e3add19@gmail.com> <CAMm+LwgNU2Dr3bB+A8k+UwbQiRRzgUkoRRh60tc6+bBv6CXwfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: http://SoftwareAndServices.NET
Message-ID: <70ed6362-41ee-faf5-8f90-d094455dbdf4@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 22:02:35 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwgNU2Dr3bB+A8k+UwbQiRRzgUkoRRh60tc6+bBv6CXwfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG profile is not trivial
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

On 1/20/20 12:32 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> It is not just the greyscale that is the issue. There are numerous issues in the diagrams that result from the chosen profile.
> 
> Compare the diagrams in:
> https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hallambaker-mesh-architecture-12.html
> 
> With the originals in:
> https://mathmesh.com/Documents/draft-hallambaker-mesh-architecture.html
> 
> Getting the diagrams to present properly is at least two weeks work for me on top of the weeks already spent. And I am probably not going to be the last person making this set of complaints. I am just the first person who developed specs that depend on having good diagrams in them.

I think I understand your point, however the example you provided is not really an SVG vs RFC-7996-SVG comparison. I also agree some of the RFC-7996-SVG limitations seem extreme.

The problem is the VISIO to RFC-7996-SVG conversion tool your using is selecting a wider font than the original. The conversion tool would need to get the em width, and match it up to a font with the same em width, or adjust the font size.

  (1) It looks like VISIO places some object to absolute positions.
  (2) VISIO seems to set some text objects relative to each other based on em ('M') width.
  (3) VISIO seems to set font size by the size of the 'M' (em) character, rather than absolute point sizes. And different fonts have a different em sizes.
  
The same is going to happen if the browser viewing mathmesh.com does not support the 'Calibri' font (unlikely, but the diagram will look messed up).

Have you tried using monospace or sans-serif in VISIO? They are also supported in RFC-7996. I am guessing you will have to tweak your VISIO file after the change.

Example, in the mathmesh.com SVG file (Calibri font):

   .st2 {fill:#000000;font-family:Calibri;font-size:1.00001em}
  ...
   <text x="11.64" y="430.18" class="st2" v:langID="1033"><v:paragraph v:horizAlign="1"/><v:tabList/>ProfileMaster<v:newlineChar/><tspan x="33.25" dy="1.2em" class="st3">Alice</tspan></text>
  
Yet in the IETF.org version is in a different font (sans-serif font):

<text x="11.64" y="430.18" fill="#000000" font-family="sans-serif" font-size="1.00001em">ProfileMaster<tspan x="33.25" y="444.580144" font-size="1em">Alice</tspan></text>

NOTE: When I update the SVG file from mathmesh.com and change the embedded CSS font from 'Calibri' (mathmesh.com) to 'sans-serif' (IETF.org), it looks as broken as the IETF.org version.

And - kind of related:

The mathmesh.com SVG file far from a standard SVG file. It contains non-SVG Microsoft extensions from the VISIO program.
(xmlns:v="http://schemas.microsoft.com/visio/2003/SVGExtensions/)

I do not think that a VISIO SVG-like file is reasonable as an example of what fails.

The VISIO team that added export to SVG to VISIO seems to have done so without regard to actually exporting standard SVG. It exports to SVG-like files.

(I am using your mathmesh.com SVG files to tweak my XSLT script to see what I can generate - I love being retired and have the time to just try things)

-- 
Doug Royer - (http://DougRoyer.US)
Douglas.Royer@gmail.com
714-989-6135
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest