- From: fuchsia via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 20:16:12 +0000
- To: public-svg-issues@w3.org
Okay, I've removed the bearing commands and the magic Z from master/paths.html and have run it through my thimbleful of tests. (\*cough\* There were none for the bearing commands. \*cough\*) I think the only diff between master/paths.html and SVG 1.1 is that the former allows negative arc radii.
As an aside, if I've followed the WG's bread crumb trail correctly, then your<sub>(plural)</sub> plan seems to be to allow CSS style `path()` functions inside the `d` attribute; i.e.
```
<svg width="100" height="100">
<!-- previously: -->
<path d="M100 0,L0 100"/>
<!-- for now: -->
<path d="path('M0 0, L100 100')"/>
<!-- eventually: -->
<path d="path(M50 0, L50 100)"/>
</svg>
```
If that's the case, then FWIW I think it would be a really good idea. It may seem ugly as sin but `p` is not a path command, so there's no whiff of ambiguity, and the quote-free form can use CSS's sophisticated specification "machinery" while ditching the legacy missteps. I kicked around other ways of doing it at the end #331 but my ideas were as crazy as bat faeces. Sticking `path()` into `d`, freezing the string pathdata in its 1.1 form, and adding new features exclusively to the CSS seems the least worst way of escaping history (the light bulb that hovers over my head lit up as soon as I saw the idea).
--
GitHub Notification of comment by fuchsia
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/335#issuecomment-385515523 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 30 April 2018 20:16:14 UTC