W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2005

RE: Request for Future Feature: Star Element

From: Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 10:38:32 +0200
To: "'Cameron McCormack'" <cam-www-svg@aka.mcc.id.au>, <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20050825083838.EA203149683@pillage.dreamhost.com>

Hi, Cameron-

| Actually, I think it would be reasonably simple to animate 
| with a 'traitDef' element for each animatable attribute and a 
| TraitMutationEvent handler in the definition's handlerGroup 
| to modify the underlying path.
| 
| While I agree that a more declarative method for mapping 
| custom elements to their shadow tree implementations should 
| exist, I think in this case it wouldn't be too hard just with script.

Fair enough. But my point is that I think it's overkill to have to use
script to make simple, common shapes like this.


| As for semantics, I think there is much work to be done to 
| decide firstly what it means to include "semantics" in their 
| SVG files and secondly how to do it, without just relying on 
| element names.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm of the inclination to say that it's
too easy to get bogged down in such a discussion, and have no practical
output. This element would be a small step toward indexable, describable
graphical content, granted... But a smalll step is sometimes very useful.
Besides, I think that such discussion has already taken place, over the
course of centuries, when we decided as a culture that regular polygons and
stars were important enough to merit their own names and iconography.

But I know people get irritated with talk of semantics, and as I said, this
isn't a Last Call comment.

Regards-
Doug

doug . schepers  @ vectoreal.com
www.vectoreal.com ...for scalable solutions.
 
Received on Thursday, 25 August 2005 08:38:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:31 GMT