HTML5 canvas style height vs attribute height - html

I am currently learning how to use HTML5 new elements and I stumbled upon a frustrating issue with all graphic functions such as fillRect() and drawImage().
I was setting the widgth and height with
style="width: 75px;height: 10px;"
instead of
width="200" height="100"
The result being that the graphics would not be the proper scale ever.
My question is, why does it make a difference? There is something I obviously do not understand about it all.
Thank you

I know that at least in JSF (specifically primefaces) the difference is that if you put height in the style- it will not be used to properly calculate and render the component (the more complex ones) sometimes. If you put it as attribute then it will work.
If HTML5 takes the similar approach it would mean that attribute height and width are the actual height and width of the component and the style is just the way to display it. Sometimes however, both approaches are going to end with the same result.
Also in primefaces when you specify height and width as attribute- you can not use percentages. This could be the key- an additional measure of enforcing specific width and heights rathen than percentages.

It was an extremely frustrating issue trying to figure out why canvas
doesn't render its shapes correctly despite doing everything right.
The fix was to set "canvas.height" and "canvas.width" correctly. Just setting "canvas.style.height" and "canvas.style.width" doesn't
rectify internal rendering of the canvas.
Almost every time, your
canvas.height = canvas.style.height
AND
canvas.width = canvas.style.width
I read somewhere that the HTML engine refers "canvas.width" and "canvas.height" while doing the calculations for painting shapes and text inside the canvas.
Whereas, "canvas.style.height" and "canvas.style.width" only determine how the browser displays that canvas alongside other HTML DOM elements. Thanks to bjedrzejewski and Munsta0 for asking this question.

Related

Setting QTextDocument painter's rectangle (where to paint)

I am painting on a window simple html using QTextDocument::drawContents(painter)
I want to do the drawing inside some margins in the window but I don't see a direct way to specify the target rectangle of the painting (in the painter/window).
I guess a few ways to do it:
Using the QTextDocuments::setMargin (although this does not allow different values for left/top.
Placing the html into an styled <div>
Applying a translation transform to the painter.
But all this seems a bit too much for what I want to do and I guess if I a missing something straight (as you do with QPainter::drawText where you tell the target rectangle)
Set the textWidth property to the width of the area where the text is supposed to fit. The clipping rectangle you pass to drawContents will cut the text off vertically if there's too much of it to fit; you can't do much about that of course.
So, this would be the missing function you're after:
void drawContents(QPainter * p, QTextDocument & doc, const QRectF & rect) {
p->save();
p->translate(rect.topLeft());
doc.setTextWidth(rect.width());
doc.drawContents(p, rect);
p->restore();
}
Yes, you do need to jump through a few hoops, that's why it needs to be factored out. It's perhaps lamentable that a similar overload of drawContents doesn't exist.

How to position an element on top of another element without using position and margin?

This is my code:
<table>...Some content...</table>
<table>...Another content...</table>
I want to put the second table on top of the first table. This is to be used as an email template (in some clients position and margin are not available).
Those are the only two options available (outside of transform, which definitely won't work if position isn't available) that will allow one element to invade another element's space. If you can't use position or margin, then you're out of luck, and you need to re-evaluate what you are trying to achieve and why. Any chance you could do this with images?
There are always ways...not always elegant, but when you have limited options, 'works' is often all you really need. IMO, creativity is as much about solving a problem with limited options as it is thinking 'outside the box'.
Most email clients allow you to set 'height', so simply wrap the first table (the background) in a div and give that div height:0px;. the table will overflow the div, but the next element won't respect it's space because it has 0 height, and will effectively be layered in front.
http://jsfiddle.net/L0d3tnzu/
If you want the size of the tables to match exactly, you'll probably have to explicitly set heights and widths, but the fiddle above illustrates the basic concept. Hope this helps!
EDIT:
Based on the additional info in the comment (the second table should only partly overlap the first table) here is an updated fiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/acq3ob6y/1/
EDIT #2:
Dang. Outlook switching to the Word/Office rendering engine for HTML/CSS might be the only way possible to get WORSE than the IE version. Sigh. (Thanks to #Gortonington for the comment/clarification, though!)
Ok, then, the idea of a background image is only a problem for retina displays (if you want them to be all crisp and beautiful and retina-ie), and retina devices are going to be handling CSS in a more modern way (hopefully!), so how about this as a solution: Media Query targeting device resolution loads CSS with the double-size img and uses css background-size to constrain it: http://jsfiddle.net/tcyjo7ok
Third try is a charm? At least the list of options is growing...
The only way to overlay two elements across email clients is through use of background images. Even this can be broken in some clients and requires a lot of conditional and reiterate code (backgrounds.cm is good resource for email bg images).
This is the only option that will display in MOST clients. Even this is still very restricted and not very agile to use (but that is true in ALL email coding). Most other techniques will only work for a couple clients and break completely in all others.

Default canvas dimensions

Can anybody tell me why the default canvas size is 300 x 150 pixels?:
http://jsfiddle.net/VqNAV/
And why my 50 x 50 square ( http://jsfiddle.net/VqNAV/1/ ) get stretched when I change the canvas size: http://jsfiddle.net/VqNAV/2/
Thanks in advance!
Edit:
I found an answer here: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13818#comments
For canvas, if you do NOT want the context to be stretched, you must modify the HTML attributes. http://jsfiddle.net/VqNAV/3/
EDIT: I think the better question is why is it inline? There is nothing in the HTML 5 draft that specifies that this is how it should be. This was a decision upon the browser creators. The canvas acts as an image and is thus treated like an image which is also inline and also has a width and height.

TextField autoSize+italics cuts of last character

In actionscript 3, my TextField has :
CSS styling
embedded fonts
textAlign : CENTER
autoSize : CENTER
... when italics are used the very right character gets slightly cut off (specially caps).
It basically seems that it fails detecting the right size.
I've had this problem before but just wondered is there a nice workaround (instead of checking textWidth or offsetting text etc.)?
Initialize your textField as you always do, using multiline, autosize, htmlText...
Then do this little trick :
// saving wanted width and height plus 1px to get some space for last char
var savedWidth = myTextField.width + 1;
var savedHeight = myTextField.height + 1;
// removing autoSize, wich is the origin of the problem i think
myTextField.autoSize = "none";
// now manually autoSizing the textField with saved values
myTextField.width = savedWidth;
myTextField.height = savedHeight;
Not that it is much comfort to you, but Flash sometimes has trouble with this seemingly simple task. CSS styling of html TextField was a nice addition but it has caused headaches for text-rendering. In fact I very rarely use CSS for styling text for that reason. I can only imagine that combining bold, italic and normal type faces within the HTML causes Flash to get some of the width calculations wrong which causes autoSize to set the mask a tiny bit short. I hope very much that the new text rendering engine in Flash Player 10 will finally fix these issues (it certainly looks better in theory).
So my solution is never to use HTML with the exception being when I require <a> links in my text ... and there are even some tricky text shifting issues there. In those cases I avoid mixing different font weights and font styles within the same text field. All other cases I use TextFormat directly on TextField.
I suppose if you can't get out of your current architecture (for some reason) you could try adding to the end of your html encoded strings. Or you could manually set the width of the field and not rely on autoSize (as you have mentioned). But if you keep on the CSS/HTML route you may find another new and painful limitation just when you don't want it.
I've had issues with TextField masks behaving differently in the Flash preview, and in the actual browser plugin. Usually, and this is strange to me, it would appear more correctly in the browser. Have you tried running the swf in a browser to see if the problem is actually an annoyance rather than a permanent problem?
I had said this:
My in-ideal approach to solving this is to attach a change event to the TextField which always adds a space after the last character of the field. And then to remember to trim this space off when using the value.
But that didn't take into account that this probably doesn't have a change event and that it's an HTML rendered text field. To add a trailing space in the HTML text field throw in an again, that's not really fixing the problem.

Getting Image height before the image loads in HTML

I have a table that is dynamically created using DIVs. Each row of the table has two images. I want to set the height for the div (that represents a particular row) to the height of image that is greater of the two images being displayed in that particular row. The images to displayed will always change, and they are from an external server.
How do I set the height for my div so that I can fit images?
If you are trying to dynamically resize a couple of divs in a row within a table, you maybe better off using a html table instead and having each image within a td tag. This will make tr tag resize accordingly for the image in each cell.
this.img = new Image();
this.img.src = url;
alert(this.img.width);
gives the width while
var img = new Image();
img.src = url;
alert(img.width);
doesnt..
dunno why.
You can:
Not specify the height of the div, and let it expand automatically
Once the image is loaded do:
document.getElementById("myDiv").height = document.getElementById("myImage").height
We'll need a little more info to be very useful. You can get the height & width of an image after the page loads via Javascript (info), then you could resize the height of the div after loading. Otherwise, you're really out of luck since HTML itself doesn't have anything.
If you're using PHP, there's getimagesize(), which you can use if you're building the site dynamically with PHP. There are similar functions for other languages, but we'd need a little more info.
If you want the browser to do layout based on the height of an image, before it fetches the image, you need to send that height to the browser somewhere. This will require something server-side. The fastest thing would be to insert in into the html directly. Slower but more elegant would be to fetch it image by image with <script src=> statements that get instructions from a special bit of javascript-generating cgi. (The speed difference comes from network round trips.)
If you're willing to resize after the data arrives, it's much simpler. Either slap an onload handler on the images or stick them in normal dom (e.g. an actual table, though you can do it with divs and css) and let the layout engine do the work.
This question has been answered in multiple ways, and you asked the additional question "Won't this make the UI look bad?"
The answer to that question is Yes. The best thing for you to do in most cases will be to set the height of your div to something that looks good, then scale the images down to fit. This will make the rendering faster, and the final product will look better and more professional.
But that's just my own opinion, though. I have no empirical data to back that up.
Pre-load them into javascript image objects then just reference the height and width.
Might take some clever devilry to work in all browsers...
function getSize(imgSrc){
var aImg = new Image();
aImg.src = imgSrc;
aHeight = newImg.height;
aWidth = newImg.width;
}