W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > January 2003

Re: More suggestions

From: Sigurd Lerstad <sigler@bredband.no>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:35:36 +0100
Message-ID: <008601c2c78a$8ab076b0$591273d5@mmstudio>
To: "Dean Jackson" <dean@w3.org>
Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>

>
> [slowly getting through all these suggestions]
>
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2003, Sigurd Lerstad wrote:
>
> >
> > Hello again :)
> >
> > Allow x/y/dx/dy/rotate on <textPath>
> >
> > Since you build a horizontal/vertical line first, and then map it to the
> > path, there should be no reason that these aren't allowed on <textPath>,
and
> > it actually made my implementation harder to implement without them.
>
> We already allow this through <tspan>.
> Place a <tspan> inside your <textpath>.
>

Yes, I just thought it would be much cleaner to allow them directly on a
textPath. After all, the initial suggestion for the text element, also
didn't have dx,dy,rotate and allowed only one value for x,y. But you then
decided to make it support the same as tspan. I think the reasoning back
then also holds for textPath.

> > And while we're on <textPath>, allow it to be transformed as well. You
can
> > transform the referenced path, but that will transform all textPaths
> > referencing it.
>
> As <textPath> is a child of <text>, you can put the transform
> on the <text>. That will transform the <textPath>.
> Or am I missing something?

So why are you putting transform on tspan? tspan is also a child of text...

It's not that I have very strong feelings about this suggestion, I just
thought it would be more logical that way :)

--
Sigurd Lerstad
Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2003 05:32:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:24 GMT