W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2004

Re: SVG 1.2 Comments

From: Philippe Lhoste <PhiLho@GMX.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:20:50 +0100
Message-ID: <41932EF2.8040603@GMX.net>
CC: www-svg@w3c.org

Scooter Morris wrote:

> My overall comment is that while it is clear that there is a lot of
 > work that went into this specification, it seems very complicated and
 > not well suited for implementation within an existing browser.  As I
 > said before, perhaps that is a secondary audience, which is fine, I'm
 > frankly having enough trouble with implementing my little piece of SVG
 > 1.1 in Mozilla (did gradients /really/ have to be able to refer to other
 > gradients?!?  Sheesh!)

Just a note: my first real (non trivial) SVG image is a clock (how
original ;-)) with some gradients.
Even as a newbie, I found natural to write:

     <linearGradient id="ClockGrad">
       <stop offset="0%"   stop-color="#CCF"/>
       <stop offset="100%" stop-color="#224"/>

     <linearGradient id="LinGradO" xlink:href="#ClockGrad"
                     x1="0" y1="0" x2="1" y2="1"/>
     <linearGradient id="LinGradI" xlink:href="#ClockGrad"
                     x1="1" y1="1" x2="0" y2="0"/>

Ie. use a same gradient, in two opposite directions.
I like it, it is powerful and concise.

Now, as would be implementor, I understand it can be found hard to get
around... That, and a lot of other spec. points.

Philippe Lhoste
--  (near) Paris -- France
--  Professional programmer and amateur artist
--  http://Phi.Lho.free.fr
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2004 09:23:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:01 UTC