Jon A. Cruz wrote:
Ahhh...
But there's a problem.
What's a pixel???
Are we 90 DPI, 75 DPI, 72 DPI...?
I think there are a few things that need to get settled down in the code before pixel-level accuracy can be hit. Unfortunately that might included changes needed for "target profile" support. Fortunately, that work will probably address this and similar issues.
Of course, it's set to happen at "some point in the future", so the schedule is not fixed.
That's right. No rasters here. ^^
I was thinking about this. Would someone really want to put an arbitrary limit on precision? What kind of granularity is proper?
For example, this PDF highway map of California: http://gocalif.ca.gov/tourism/pdfs/Map_CAstate.pdf
Imaging this recast as SVG.
If its resolution were limited, then the macro image would be ok, but the fine detail would be illegible. One would not be able to zoom in and still have accurate lines, or font->curve conversion.
IMHO, it should not necessarily be a fixed precision, but a "best fit" for the given dynamic range of the whole image.
-Or- it might be to use a selected percentage of the dimensions of the page's viewBox.
Bob