Re: GSoC Proposal - SVG Export

[Étienne Beaulé]

To re-open this thread:

Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough about LY’s export formats. I thought I was clear 
with the distinction I drew between my terminology of « application » and « 
program » from my first message. Sadly Ghostscript has deprecated its SVG 
capabilities.

I was sadly unavailable last year for GSoC, but I have submitted my proposal 
for this year, with the addition of improving SVG WOFF through SMuFL.

I seem to recall another student post here with initiative for that part, and 
would be glad to work with them, or focus on how to get his work on the SVG 
backend.

Cordially,
Étienne

> Le 4 déc. 2018 à 09:39, Paul Morris <address@hidden> a écrit :
> 
> On 12/3/18 10:07 AM, Richard Shann wrote:
> 
>> what seems strange is that there seems to be no concept of "backgound
>> color" in SVG (logical in a way as SVG is about things you can draw)
>> allowing for the possibility of drawing white on white.
> 
> 
> Easily setting a background color would be a nice option to have.  There's 
> this snippet, and it works for SVG (but there's room for improvement):
> 
> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=699
> 
> 
>> yes, you add stuff to the LilyPond input to color everything explicitly
>> black. IIRC you can specify extra stuff to be included from the command
>> line too.
> 
> 
> Ah, right, like this: http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=443
> 
> That wraps everything in <g> tags with a color property, like so:
> 
> <g color="rgb(0%, 0%, 100%)">
>   <rect fill="currentColor" />
> </g>
> 
> 
> Would probably be better if it did this instead:
> 
> <rect fill="rgb(0%, 0%, 100%)" />
> 
Precisely. I’ve already stated that: « […] In terms of colour, it currently 
wraps objects of a colour in a <g tag to change the current colour of 
sub-elements. Thus, there should be better use of SVG styling with some 
modifications on the use of currentColor […] »