SVG output problems
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:58 pm
After adding your fix to the code for a windowless chart, I now have an svg chart on my screen.
Some initial notes:
1. Top title is placed incorrectly (mine had a negative y value for the text) which means it doesn't show up anywhere. Switching it to positive places it correctly.
2. The font size for the top and bottom titles are specified in negative point sizes. Doesn't seem to bother svg, but I think it should be positive. (presumably this is done in Windows to specify the "actual" height rather than the height with extra top/bottom space)
3. The labels on the chart are all above the bars, though I specified (and the corresonding .bmp renders) that they should be below the bars.
4. In order to get the svg to scale in the browser, rather than be a fixed size... which is why I wanted svg instead of raster. I changed the svg tag to have a viewBox of "0 0 300 200" instead of a height and width. Perhaps this option is already available.
5. All of the fonts are quite a bit larger than in the raster image.
I'm still working with it. And I'm going into your code to see what's up with these things. More soon, but I'd appreciate any comments on these items.
Thanks,
-pete
Some initial notes:
1. Top title is placed incorrectly (mine had a negative y value for the text) which means it doesn't show up anywhere. Switching it to positive places it correctly.
2. The font size for the top and bottom titles are specified in negative point sizes. Doesn't seem to bother svg, but I think it should be positive. (presumably this is done in Windows to specify the "actual" height rather than the height with extra top/bottom space)
3. The labels on the chart are all above the bars, though I specified (and the corresonding .bmp renders) that they should be below the bars.
4. In order to get the svg to scale in the browser, rather than be a fixed size... which is why I wanted svg instead of raster. I changed the svg tag to have a viewBox of "0 0 300 200" instead of a height and width. Perhaps this option is already available.
5. All of the fonts are quite a bit larger than in the raster image.
I'm still working with it. And I'm going into your code to see what's up with these things. More soon, but I'd appreciate any comments on these items.
Thanks,
-pete