Problem using SVGs in a BorderImage on the N950

[h3nk3]

Hi,

I've been using SVGs in my BorderImages on Symbian like this:

@
BorderImage {
source: "border.svg"
sourceSize: Qt.size(10, 10)
width: 100
height: sourceSize.height
border {
top: 1.5
right: 1.5
bottom: 1.5
left: 1
}
}
@

This rasterizes the SVG in the size I want and then uses the borders to stretch the image the way I want. Works perfectly.

Now when taking my project over to Harmattan Meego. Which is using QtQuick 1.1 if I'm not mistaken the log tells me that:
@
Invalid property assignment: "sourceSize" is a read-only property
@

Why has this changed? Is there some other way I'm supposed to use my SVGs with BorderImage that I'm not aware of?

[thisisbhaskar]

Very strange as sourceSize is not a read-only property according to the documentation

http://library.developer.nokia.com/topic/MeeGo_1.2_Harmattan_API/html/qt4/qdeclarativeelements.html

[h3nk3]

Actually the documentation for Harmattan states this for the BorderImage element:

@
sourceSize : QSize

This property holds the actual width and height of the loaded image.

In BorderImage, this property is read-only.

See also Image::sourceSize.
@

But my question is why has this changed from previous versions of QtQuick?

It's not backwards compatible either (I cannot just write import QtQuick 1.0 and everything works as before).

[thisisbhaskar]

[quote author="h3nk3" date="1311760656"]Actually the documentation for Harmattan states this for the BorderImage element:
@
sourceSize : QSize
@
[/quote]

What is interesting is that for all read-only properties.. the documentation standard is something like this

@
sourceSize : QSize read-only
@

Its confusing to see that its not followed though-out.

[mlong]

You could possibly look into using a "QDeclarativeImageProvider":http://doc.qt.nokia.com/4.7/qdeclarativeimageprovider.html to rasterize your SVGs to a given size that could then be scaled.

[h3nk3]

Yes that's actually what I've been doing today.

But still wondering why this limitation was introduced though.

[mlong]

I'm wondering (pure speculation) if it wasn't so much of a recent introduction that it's read-only but rather it might have been designed to be read-only from the beginning, but was mistakenly allowed to be modified on Symbian.

I don't have the code or docs for both side-by-side at the moment, though. So, like I said, it's just a thought right now.

[h3nk3]

Yeah, maybe that's true. Thanks for the replies!