From: Brian Birtles <birtles@gmail.com>

Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 11:43:00 +0900

Message-ID: <4FC2E634.40200@gmail.com>

To: public-fx@w3.org

Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 11:43:00 +0900

Message-ID: <4FC2E634.40200@gmail.com>

To: public-fx@w3.org

Hi Dirk, Thanks very much for looking into this. (2012/05/27 1:56), Dirk Schulze wrote: > My question is the following: Every transform function (independent if translate, scale or rotate) is just a shorthand for the underlaying transformation matrix (3x3/(3x2) or 4x4). I don't understand this point. If you have a translate of type="rotate" which goes from -360 to 720 it should spin three times. If you represent the endpoints as matrices you get no spinning at all. May this refers to the result of the function? > Of course it is also possible to define the neutral element for every single transform function. That sounds good to me. I prefer intuitive authoring to mathematical consistency. On that note, while we're at it, maybe we can fix scaling? Frankly, I think the behaviour of the example: <rect width="100" height="100"> <animateTransform attributeName="transform" attributeType="XML" type="scale" by="1" dur="5s" fill="freeze"/> </rect> which scales from 0->1 is counter-intuitive. I think scale from 1->2 is more intuitive from an authoring perspective but unfortunately that's not how it works for animateTransform.[1] Maybe we can fix this for animate with transform lists? Best regards, Brian Birtles [1] http://brian.sol1.net/svg/animatetransform-issues/by-animation-and-scale-transformations/Received on Monday, 28 May 2012 02:43:33 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:57:11 UTC
*