- From: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:03:08 -0800
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Cc: "whatwg@lists.whatwg.org" <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Monday, November 18, 2013, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'robert@ocallahan.org');>
> > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Jussi Kalliokoski <
>> jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
>> 'jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Path is also too generic even in the context of graphics. If we later on
>>> want to add a path object for 3-dimensional paths, you end up with Path
>>> and
>>> Path3D? Yay for consistency. Path2D would immediately inform what
>>> dimensions we're dealing with and also that this is to do with graphics,
>>> and thus sounds like a good name to me.
>>>
>>
>> Sounds good to me.
>>
>
> Elliot,
>
> what do you think, is Path2D acceptable?
>
Sounds great to me, lets do it!
- E
Received on Monday, 18 November 2013 18:03:35 UTC