>If there is a way to configure the renderer such that no text is clipped and >no textfields extend beyond the desired boundaries of the renderer.
In fact, when the font gets large, I will have to extend the default padding to contain the mandatory space above the text (= tighTextTopOffset). Do you consider this as " textfields extend beyond the desired boundaries of the renderer" ? Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : lundi 24 février 2014 18:17 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground Well, this is the kind of torture that happens when code attempts to fool the player. If there is a way to configure the renderer such that no text is clipped and no textfields extend beyond the desired boundaries of the renderer, then you can set opaque background. But if the configuration is such that you can't, you might have to trade-off performance for accuracy by not setting opaque background. I'd probably add some flag that controls whether you run new code paths or leave it as it was. -Alex ________________________________________ From: Maurice Amsellem [maurice.amsel...@systar.com] Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:51 AM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground >So, you may need to override opaque background and draw it yourself. Actually the colored background is drawn twice: 1) in drawBackground, using drawRect, for mouse hit testing (opaqueBackground does not react to mouse hit, apparently). 2) using opaqueBackground, so that bitmap caching and scrolling are faster: this is done by AIR, and cannot be overridden IMO drawBackground & opaqueBackground are only set is there is a backgroundColor. So I don't think I can remove the opaqueBackgorund, or emulate it. ---- FYI, I am almost done with the fix, following the proposal below: - extent the top padding when font is large and tightTopOffset > topPadding, to account for opaqueBackground. - modify tightTextTopOffset to include descent ( I have made this one an mx_internal option to STF, turned off by default, could be removed if necessary ). It seems to be working fine. I will run the Mobile mustella tests to make sure there are no regressions. Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : lundi 24 février 2014 15:57 À : dev@flex.apache.org; Maurice Amsellem Objet : RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground Imo once the code starts doing magic the code must do more magic to emulate other player behavior. So, you may need to override opaque background and draw it yourself. Sent via the PANTECH Discover, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone. Maurice Amsellem <maurice.amsel...@systar.com> wrote: Alex, please ignore (most of ) previous email. I was on the wrong path, thinking the issue was in the sizing, while it was in the positioning: To do that, I has set the opaqueBackground and the item background to different colors: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12630646/IconItemRenderer%20with%20debug%20colors.jpg -The light colors (light green, ligh red) represent the Flex-drawn backgrounds - the saturated colors is from the opaqueBackground. What it shows is that: -> when top padding is lower than tight tightTopOffset, then overflow will occur, because opaque background is also Drawn in the empty pixels above the text. In the attached screenshot, second item top offset leaks over first item (leak is the saturated green rectangle). Since padding is fixed (depends only on the DPI) but tightTopOffset depends on the text size, Over a given font size, overflow will occur: For IconItemRenderer, top padding is set to 6 pixels, and tightTopOffset for a 50pix font is 12. Probme does not show for LabelItemRenderer, because top padding is set to 12 pixels. Solution: When the top padding is < tightTopOffset, use tightTopOffset as the top padding for text, so that overflow does not occur. What do you think ? Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com] Envoyé : lundi 24 février 2014 10:57 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground >I looked quickly at how tightTextHeight gets computed and it seems to use >measuredTextSize.y which seems to use textHeight, which I thought included >descent if there are any >descenders in the glyphs for the text to be >displayed. _tightTextHeight = measuredTextSize.y - _tightTextTopOffset - bottomOffset; bottomOffset = StyleableTextField.TEXT_HEIGHT_PADDING/2 + metrics.descent [+ metrics.leading]; So it does not include the descent (and the debugging figures confirm that). >I think the problem is in getTextTopOffset. It appears to be scanning a >bitmap for the top of the glyphs! I thought there were lineMetrics >information that could be used to compute it. I have found nothing in the docs that comes closes to getTextTopOffset, in TextLineMetrics except the 2-pix top gutter. http://help.adobe.com/en_US/FlashPlatform/reference/actionscript/3/flash/text/TextLineMetrics.html The actual topTextOffset values are 5 pixels for font-12, and 12 pixels for font-50, so it's not minor. >For #1, the STF is saying it only needs to be big enough to show the top and >bottom of all of the glyphs, and then there is probably some other magic >somewhere such that, when it is >actually sized, it makes itself a little >bigger so the player can show the gutter/padding around the text. If the STF >was actually sized to tightTextHeight, the gutter/padding would clip the >>text. Then getLayoutBoundsHeight() has to fix that magic so when asked, the >STF does appear to have just enough height for the glyphs. I agree with the principle of that, although I am not sure that the "magic" computations are correct (have to check) But even assuming the computations are correct, there is still a problem with the way it's used in mobile item renderers: - LabelItemRenderer is using tightTextHeight of its STF children to compute its height - BUT *opaqueBackground* is using the actual size of its STF children to compute the size of the opaque background. Since one is much larger than the other, it's overflowing on the other renderers, with the side effect that selection is clipped and bottom separators are hidden when using large fonts. (for smaller fonts, the padding compensate for that). ---- IMO, the (complex) solution would be that LabelItemRenderer extents (including padding) and opaqueBackground extents match, so that it doesn't overflow. Need to think about it more... Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : lundi 24 février 2014 06:20 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground Hmm. I looked quickly at how tightTextHeight gets computed and it seems to use measuredTextSize.y which seems to use textHeight, which I thought included descent if there are any descenders in the glyphs for the text to be displayed. So to me, the code looks ok, but I'm not debugging into it like you are. For #1, the STF is saying it only needs to be big enough to show the top and bottom of all of the glyphs, and then there is probably some other magic somewhere such that, when it is actually sized, it makes itself a little bigger so the player can show the gutter/padding around the text. If the STF was actually sized to tightTextHeight, the gutter/padding would clip the text. Then getLayoutBoundsHeight() has to fix that magic so when asked, the STF does appear to have just enough height for the glyphs. I think the problem is in getTextTopOffset. It appears to be scanning a bitmap for the top of the glyphs! I thought there were lineMetrics information that could be used to compute it. -Alex ________________________________________ From: Maurice Amsellem [maurice.amsel...@systar.com] Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:56 PM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground More findings (and questions): I am considering the case when StyleableTextField useTightTextBound=true (regular r/o labels): 1) getPreferredBoundsHeight() returns tightTextHeight (which is basically the pixel height of "T" for single line text, and top pixel to baseline of last line for multineline ) The comment says " This is the height used for positioning text according to its baseline" - I think that is OK for text with no descent (such as "Table") but not if text that has descent (ex "Expected"). In doubt, I would take the higher measure, not the lower one, to make sure no clipping occurs. 2) getLayoutBoundsHeight() returns height - (measuredTextSize.y - tightTextHeight) The comment says: // we want to return the text field height without the top and bottom offsets // (measuredTextSize.y - tightTextHeight) gives us the sum of top and bottom offsets - The first comment makes sense (height without offsets). But the calculation really does not make sense to me !?! IMO, both functions should return the same value, that is the height from the top pixel to the bottom pixel of the text, majored to make sure no clipping occurs. It should simply be: tightTextHeight + metrics.descent what do you think ? Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com] Envoyé : dimanche 23 février 2014 20:37 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground >I agree that the logic may need fixing. It may not have been tested at >large font sizes Yes. In fact, for small enough fonts, the measuring/layout computations approximations were somehow compensated by big enough paddings. I have seen that useTightTextBound=true is for regural text and useTightTextBound=false for editable text (TextArea, TextInput). So I will focus on the case where useTightTextBound = true, to minimize the impact. This will probably break some Mustella mobile tests. Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : dimanche 23 février 2014 20:10 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground I agree that the logic may need fixing. It may not have been tested at large font sizes. IIRC, tight text bounds tries to ignore the "gutter" around the textfield. There is always a few more pixels in the TextField around the actual text. -Alex ________________________________________ From: Maurice Amsellem [maurice.amsel...@systar.com] Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 10:25 AM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground The 15% was an empirical finding based on comparing "unscaledHeight" and the apparent physical height in pixels of the renderered item. So let's forget this for a moment, as I don't know where it comes from. Searching more, I found something else: StylableTextField has "useTightTextBounds=true", which is logical, as we want precise measurement. In the measure() function of IconItemRenderer, the preferred height of the text is retrieved by calling : STF.getPreferredBoundHeight() which returns, in this case , tightTextHeight (let's say 36 in our example). So one would think that when the STF is sized in layoutContents(), using the same value, the text will get the same height: layoutContents() labelDisplay. setLayoutBoundsSize ( width, 36). But in StylableTextField. setLayoutBoundsSize(), there is some logic regarding useTightTextBounds And at the end it set text.height = 63 !! (instead of 36). I don't know if SFT. setLayoutBoundSize (STF.getPreferredWidth() , STF.getPreferredBoundHeight) should be a no-op, I wonder if this logic needs to be reviewed ?? Line 1687 and follows: if (useTightTextBounds) { if (newHeight > 0) { var bottomOffset:Number = measuredTextSize.y - tightTextTopOffset - tightTextHeight; // when clipping, allow gutter to be outside of height // use 2x gutter (actual gutter is not part of tight text height) // when newHeight==1, actual visible height==3 (1px + 1x gutter) if (newHeight < tightTextHeight) bottomOffset = StyleableTextField.TEXT_HEIGHT_PADDING; // re-add the top and bottom offsets. (measuredTextSize.y - tightTextHeight) gives us // the sum of top and bottom offsets newHeight += (tightTextTopOffset + bottomOffset); } } this.height = newHeight; Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : dimanche 23 février 2014 17:45 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : RE: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground The TextField extent is surprising to me. What does it mean to be 15% larger? What does transform.pixelbounds show? Does it have to do with the border or background property? -Alex ________________________________________ From: Maurice Amsellem [maurice.amsel...@systar.com] Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 5:20 AM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: Need your help on problem with opaqueBackground Hi team, Piotr has raised an interesting issue in mobile apps: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34107 When using a large font (size > 40) with IconItemRenderer on spark List, the bottom separators between items are not displayed. After some hours of debugging, I finally found the cause, but don't know how to fix it, because it's related to AIR. Here is the story, in short (details in the ticket): - Mobile item renderers "opaqueBackground=color" property draws an opaque background behind item renderers, to make scrolling faster (no transparency). - When StyleableTextField (text used in mobile renderers, inheriting from TextField) is given WxH size in flex, its actual extent will be around 15% larger - the opaqueBackground extent of a renderer (DisplayObject) is computed based on the cumulated extents of its children, not of its own width and height In LabelItemRenderer, the padding around the renderer is big enough (16 px at 160 DPI) to compensate for this excess size for fonts not too large However, in IconItemRender, the padding is set to 8px, so when the font size > 50, opaqueBackgorund overflows the item render size, and separator lines are masked. There are many ways of fixing this : - increase the padding in IconItemRenderer, for 'reasonable' font sizes - modify the measure() to account for the excess size, so that opaqueBackground never overflows. - etc... What do you think ? Maurice
