The width of a given string place on a canvas in a specified font seems 
to match the value returned by [font measure].  In my specific case, 
that value is 60.

However, if I rotate the text by 90 degrees so that the string is 
vertical (using 8.6 code), the string now takes up about 70 pixels in 
height.  I need to adjust the rotated string so that it's only 60 pixels 
high.

So, it would seem that I need to know some sort of ratio value in order 
to modify the font associated with my vertical strings. So, what things 
play into that value (non-square pixels?, screen aspect ratio?, etc) and 
how do I get to them?

Thanks,

Jeff

Jeff Godfrey wrote:

> So, it would seem that I need to know some sort of ratio value in order 
> to modify the font associated with my vertical strings. So, what things 
> play into that value (non-square pixels?, screen aspect ratio?, etc) and 
> how do I get to them?

Hmmm... Upon further investigation, something seems wrong here.  When 
the text is rotated 90 degrees, it's noticeably larger (in width and 
height).  I'd guess that's not expected, is it?

FWIW, I'm using an AS build - 8.6b1.1 on Win7 x64.

Jeff

Jeff Godfrey wrote:

> Hmmm... Upon further investigation, something seems wrong here.

Bug report filed as SF with additional details (ref # 2993702)

Jeff

On 28 Apr, 17:14, Jeff Godfrey <jeff_godf...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Hmmm... Upon further investigation, something seems wrong here. =A0When
> the text is rotated 90 degrees, it's noticeably larger (in width and
> height). =A0I'd guess that's not expected, is it?

As far as I'm aware, we just ask for an angled font of a particular
size and leave Windows to do the rest. Have you tried doing an angle
of 0.01 in comparison with zero-angle text? That does angled lettering
(exercising the same code as the 90 degree case) but does not *appear*
to be rotated at the sizes you're working with. It's a technique I
used when debugging the X11 and OSX rotated font code...

(I don't have a system suitably comparable for testing.)

Donal.

Donal K. Fellows wrote:
> Have you tried doing an angle
> of 0.01 in comparison with zero-angle text? That does angled lettering
> (exercising the same code as the 90 degree case) but does not *appear*
> to be rotated at the sizes you're working with. It's a technique I
> used when debugging the X11 and OSX rotated font code...

Donal,

Great suggestion - thanks.  Yes, rotating the string to 0.01 does 
exhibit the originally reported problem.  That is, the text grows in 
exactly the same way (and in the same amount) as the 90 degree rotation.

The originally reported clipping issues are evident in this case also.

Jeff

On 29 Apr, 00:13, Jeff Godfrey <jeff_godf...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Great suggestion - thanks. =A0Yes, rotating the string to 0.01 does
> exhibit the originally reported problem. =A0That is, the text grows in
> exactly the same way (and in the same amount) as the 90 degree rotation.

OK, so it's getting the font size wrong when applying the rotation.
*bad*word* :-(

> The originally reported clipping issues are evident in this case
> also.

That's expected given what you reported above. Tk calculates the
metrics unrotated and then rotates them (it's easier than calculating
metrics directly with rotated fonts).

Donal.

On Apr 29, 9:48=A0am, "Donal K. Fellows"
<donal.k.fell...@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> That's expected given what you reported above. Tk calculates the
> metrics unrotated and then rotates them (it's easier than calculating
> metrics directly with rotated fonts).

Then could it be that the rotated font has a different point-size-to-
actual-size ratio than the original ? At 45 degrees, the bounding box
of a given square character is sqrt(2) times larger than the original,
so you need a bitmap that much larger...

-Alex

On 29 Apr, 09:48, Alexandre Ferrieux <alexandre.ferri...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Then could it be that the rotated font has a different point-size-to-
> actual-size ratio than the original ?

If that's the case, then either we're asking for the wrong thing
somewhere, or there's a bug in Windows's font system, or there's a bug
in the Consolas font itself. I can't really pursue this though; I've
no Win7 system and back when I wrote the code it appeared to work when
I was spinning text in WinXP. (I have no idea whether I tested with
the Consolas font.)

Donal.

On Apr 29, 12:47=A0pm, "Donal K. Fellows"
<donal.k.fell...@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 29 Apr, 09:48, Alexandre Ferrieux <alexandre.ferri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Then could it be that the rotated font has a different point-size-to-
> > actual-size ratio than the original ?
>
> If that's the case, then either we're asking for the wrong thing
> somewhere, or there's a bug in Windows's font system, or there's a bug
> in the Consolas font itself.

Yes, but waiting for Windows to fix itself is not in our roadmap,
right ?

On the workaround side, can you explain why "it's easier than
calculating metrics directly with rotated fonts" ? Is it hard to call
GetTextMetrics() on the rotated font ?

-Alex

On 4/29/2010 5:47 AM, Donal K. Fellows wrote:
> On 29 Apr, 09:48, Alexandre Ferrieux<alexandre.ferri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Then could it be that the rotated font has a different point-size-to-
>> actual-size ratio than the original ?
>
> If that's the case, then either we're asking for the wrong thing
> somewhere, or there's a bug in Windows's font system, or there's a bug
> in the Consolas font itself. I can't really pursue this though; I've
> no Win7 system and back when I wrote the code it appeared to work when
> I was spinning text in WinXP. (I have no idea whether I tested with
> the Consolas font.)

I haven't tried anything but the Consolas font.  I'll check out some 
other fonts today and report back.  Also, I haven't tried this under XP 
as I don't have an 8.6 installation on an XP box.  I'll remedy that 
today and give it a try.

Jeff

On 4/29/2010 7:29 AM, Jeff Godfrey wrote:
> On 4/29/2010 5:47 AM, Donal K. Fellows wrote:
>> On 29 Apr, 09:48, Alexandre Ferrieux<alexandre.ferri...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Then could it be that the rotated font has a different point-size-to-
>>> actual-size ratio than the original ?
>>
>> If that's the case, then either we're asking for the wrong thing
>> somewhere, or there's a bug in Windows's font system, or there's a bug
>> in the Consolas font itself. I can't really pursue this though; I've
>> no Win7 system and back when I wrote the code it appeared to work when
>> I was spinning text in WinXP. (I have no idea whether I tested with
>> the Consolas font.)
>
> I haven't tried anything but the Consolas font. I'll check out some
> other fonts today and report back. Also, I haven't tried this under XP
> as I don't have an 8.6 installation on an XP box. I'll remedy that today
> and give it a try.
>
> Jeff

OK,

I just installed 8.6b1.1 on an XP box.  Testing there shows that it's 
not a Win 7 problem - XP shows exactly the same issues.  However, 
testing with different fonts provide some interesting info...

At first blush, it appears to be a problem only when using monospaced 
fonts (Consolas, Courier, etc).  So far, every monospaced font I've 
tested shows the problem.  In addition, the typical Windows proportional 
fonts (Tahoma, Verdana, etc) seem to be OK.

I'll update the ticket with this info sometime this morning.

Jeff