W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2010

[whatwg] Non-blocking SVG Canvas?

From: Kevin Ar18 <kevinar18@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 21:14:52 -0400
Message-ID: <SNT110-W445AC4D316A798F3189559AA910@phx.gbl>


First off, where would be an appropriate area to continue this conversation?
I'm guessing the discussion is becoming less relevant to the HTML5 spec... and I don't want to bother others on this list.  (Sorry to everyone for any issues this causes.)

Would this be better continued on the SVG mailing list, the whatwg implementation list, or via private email?


> >>> Is it possible to create an SVG shape (say a hollow circle) that allows you to click through the invisible areas of the svg canvas to html objects underneath?
> >>
> >> Yes. See http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/interact.html#PointerEventsProperty
> >
> > Quick question, if you are familiar with it.
> >
> > This seems to only affect SVG objects interacting with other SVG objects (inside an SVG canvas).
> >
> > Does it also apply to the SVG canvas inside an HTML page?
>
> This might depend on the browser, since nothing actually defines the
> interaction of SVG and HTML in this area very well. Per SVG spec,
> pointer-events is not supposed to apply to , for example.

If I may pose another question:
Consider the following:
* Insert an svg tag inside another svg tag
* Layer the svg tags on top of each other.
* Put content inside each svg tag.
* Notice how the layered svg tag is treated like it has the following default properties:
pointer-events:painted
visibility:visible

My question is as follows:
* Why do browsers do this? Is there somewhere in the specs that says empty (the transparent areas of) svg tags embedded inside another svg tag should "act like they do not exist"?

The reason I ask, is because if this is defined in the spec somewhere, then that means an svg tag embedded in html should have the same properties (transparent areas should be click-through and/or pointer-events:painted should work).


Here is an example:
----------------------- 		 	   		  
Received on Thursday, 5 August 2010 18:14:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:59 UTC