Inkscape

Bugs item #1061934, was opened at 2004-11-07 18:10
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by buliabyak
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Category: Other
Group: All Platforms
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Peter J. R. Moulder (pjrm)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: visible child in hidden parent

Initial Comment:
In the following example:

<svg>
 <g style="visibility:hidden">
  <rect style="fill:red;visibility:visible" x="100"
y="100" width="50" height="50"/>
  <rect style="fill:yellow" x="200" y="100" width="50"
height="50"/>
 </g>
</svg>

we believe the "correct" rendering[*1] is to draw the
red rectangle but not the yellow one, whereas various
versions of inkscape draw either both or neither
(before/after mental's sp-item.cpp and style.cpp
changes committed 2004-10-16 07:21:01 UTC).

[One complication in evaluating inkscape's behaviour
with that one-line test case I gave on jabber is that
until Sunday, Inkscape wasn't reading visibility
attributes, it only consulted visibility in style strings.]

[*1] This is what batik and adobe's viewer do (Bulia
you may wish to confirm that this is still the case
with this revised example), and is in line with one
sentence in
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/painting.html#VisibilityControl
("Setting 'visibility' to hidden on a 'g' will make its
children invisible as long as the children do not
specify their own 'visibility' properties as
visible."), though elsewhere there is some confusion as
to whether or not visibility is an inherited property.
 The very next sentence claims that it is not, but the
table below it claims that it is.  CSS2
(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visufx.html#propdef-visibility)
has a different table for visibility (inherited: no,
but initial value: inherit).  The SVG spec says that
the CSS2 definition is normative "Except for any
additional information provided in this specification",
which to me is unclear as to which is authoritative
where the two specs conflict.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-07 18:25

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

Confirm that batik/adobe show red but not yellow. Inkscape
currently shows none.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Bugs item #1061934, was opened at 2004-11-07 18:10
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by buliabyak
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Category: Other
Group: All Platforms
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Peter J. R. Moulder (pjrm)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: visible child in hidden parent

Initial Comment:
In the following example:

<svg>
 <g style="visibility:hidden">
  <rect style="fill:red;visibility:visible" x="100"
y="100" width="50" height="50"/>
  <rect style="fill:yellow" x="200" y="100" width="50"
height="50"/>
 </g>
</svg>

we believe the "correct" rendering[*1] is to draw the
red rectangle but not the yellow one, whereas various
versions of inkscape draw either both or neither
(before/after mental's sp-item.cpp and style.cpp
changes committed 2004-10-16 07:21:01 UTC).

[One complication in evaluating inkscape's behaviour
with that one-line test case I gave on jabber is that
until Sunday, Inkscape wasn't reading visibility
attributes, it only consulted visibility in style strings.]

[*1] This is what batik and adobe's viewer do (Bulia
you may wish to confirm that this is still the case
with this revised example), and is in line with one
sentence in
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/painting.html#VisibilityControl
("Setting 'visibility' to hidden on a 'g' will make its
children invisible as long as the children do not
specify their own 'visibility' properties as
visible."), though elsewhere there is some confusion as
to whether or not visibility is an inherited property.
 The very next sentence claims that it is not, but the
table below it claims that it is.  CSS2
(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visufx.html#propdef-visibility)
has a different table for visibility (inherited: no,
but initial value: inherit).  The SVG spec says that
the CSS2 definition is normative "Except for any
additional information provided in this specification",
which to me is unclear as to which is authoritative
where the two specs conflict.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-20 06:09

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

This is less relevant now that we switched to display
property. CSS visibility property is not officially
supported still.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-07 18:25

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

Confirm that batik/adobe show red but not yellow. Inkscape
currently shows none.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Bugs item #1061934, was opened at 2004-11-08 02:10
Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by pjrm
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Category: Other
Group: All Platforms
Status: Open
Resolution: None
>Priority: 2
Submitted By: Peter J. R. Moulder (pjrm)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: visible child in hidden parent

Initial Comment:
In the following example:

<svg>
 <g style="visibility:hidden">
  <rect style="fill:red;visibility:visible" x="100"
y="100" width="50" height="50"/>
  <rect style="fill:yellow" x="200" y="100" width="50"
height="50"/>
 </g>
</svg>

we believe the "correct" rendering[*1] is to draw the
red rectangle but not the yellow one, whereas various
versions of inkscape draw either both or neither
(before/after mental's sp-item.cpp and style.cpp
changes committed 2004-10-16 07:21:01 UTC).

[One complication in evaluating inkscape's behaviour
with that one-line test case I gave on jabber is that
until Sunday, Inkscape wasn't reading visibility
attributes, it only consulted visibility in style strings.]

[*1] This is what batik and adobe's viewer do (Bulia
you may wish to confirm that this is still the case
with this revised example), and is in line with one
sentence in
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/painting.html#VisibilityControl
("Setting 'visibility' to hidden on a 'g' will make its
children invisible as long as the children do not
specify their own 'visibility' properties as
visible."), though elsewhere there is some confusion as
to whether or not visibility is an inherited property.
 The very next sentence claims that it is not, but the
table below it claims that it is.  CSS2
(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visufx.html#propdef-visibility)
has a different table for visibility (inherited: no,
but initial value: inherit).  The SVG spec says that
the CSS2 definition is normative "Except for any
additional information provided in this specification",
which to me is unclear as to which is authoritative
where the two specs conflict.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-20 14:09

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

This is less relevant now that we switched to display
property. CSS visibility property is not officially
supported still.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-08 02:25

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

Confirm that batik/adobe show red but not yellow. Inkscape
currently shows none.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Bugs item #1061934, was opened at 2004-11-07 07:10
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nobody
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Other
Group: All Platforms
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 2
Submitted By: Peter J. R. Moulder (pjrm)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: visible child in hidden parent

Initial Comment:
In the following example:

<svg>
 <g style="visibility:hidden">
  <rect style="fill:red;visibility:visible" x="100"
y="100" width="50" height="50"/>
  <rect style="fill:yellow" x="200" y="100" width="50"
height="50"/>
 </g>
</svg>

we believe the "correct" rendering[*1] is to draw the
red rectangle but not the yellow one, whereas various
versions of inkscape draw either both or neither
(before/after mental's sp-item.cpp and style.cpp
changes committed 2004-10-16 07:21:01 UTC).

[One complication in evaluating inkscape's behaviour
with that one-line test case I gave on jabber is that
until Sunday, Inkscape wasn't reading visibility
attributes, it only consulted visibility in style strings.]

[*1] This is what batik and adobe's viewer do (Bulia
you may wish to confirm that this is still the case
with this revised example), and is in line with one
sentence in
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/painting.html#VisibilityControl
("Setting 'visibility' to hidden on a 'g' will make its
children invisible as long as the children do not
specify their own 'visibility' properties as
visible."), though elsewhere there is some confusion as
to whether or not visibility is an inherited property.
 The very next sentence claims that it is not, but the
table below it claims that it is.  CSS2
(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visufx.html#propdef-visibility)
has a different table for visibility (inherited: no,
but initial value: inherit).  The SVG spec says that
the CSS2 definition is normative "Except for any
additional information provided in this specification",
which to me is unclear as to which is authoritative
where the two specs conflict.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2005-08-25 08:57

Message:
Logged In: NO 

0.42.2+ shows both rectangles, again

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-19 19:09

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

This is less relevant now that we switched to display
property. CSS visibility property is not officially
supported still.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-07 07:25

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

Confirm that batik/adobe show red but not yellow. Inkscape
currently shows none.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Bugs item #1061934, was opened at 2004-11-07 16:10
Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by rwst
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
>Category: SVG
Group: All Platforms
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 2
Submitted By: Peter J. R. Moulder (pjrm)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: visible child in hidden parent

Initial Comment:
In the following example:

<svg>
 <g style="visibility:hidden">
  <rect style="fill:red;visibility:visible" x="100"
y="100" width="50" height="50"/>
  <rect style="fill:yellow" x="200" y="100" width="50"
height="50"/>
 </g>
</svg>

we believe the "correct" rendering[*1] is to draw the
red rectangle but not the yellow one, whereas various
versions of inkscape draw either both or neither
(before/after mental's sp-item.cpp and style.cpp
changes committed 2004-10-16 07:21:01 UTC).

[One complication in evaluating inkscape's behaviour
with that one-line test case I gave on jabber is that
until Sunday, Inkscape wasn't reading visibility
attributes, it only consulted visibility in style strings.]

[*1] This is what batik and adobe's viewer do (Bulia
you may wish to confirm that this is still the case
with this revised example), and is in line with one
sentence in
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/painting.html#VisibilityControl
("Setting 'visibility' to hidden on a 'g' will make its
children invisible as long as the children do not
specify their own 'visibility' properties as
visible."), though elsewhere there is some confusion as
to whether or not visibility is an inherited property.
 The very next sentence claims that it is not, but the
table below it claims that it is.  CSS2
(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visufx.html#propdef-visibility)
has a different table for visibility (inherited: no,
but initial value: inherit).  The SVG spec says that
the CSS2 definition is normative "Except for any
additional information provided in this specification",
which to me is unclear as to which is authoritative
where the two specs conflict.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2005-08-25 17:57

Message:
Logged In: NO 

0.42.2+ shows both rectangles, again

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-20 04:09

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

This is less relevant now that we switched to display
property. CSS visibility property is not officially
supported still.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: bulia byak (buliabyak)
Date: 2004-11-07 16:25

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=741217

Confirm that batik/adobe show red but not yellow. Inkscape
currently shows none.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=604306&aid=1061934&group_id=93438