W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > October 2010

Re: <animateMotion> specification clarification

From: Nikolas Zimmermann <zimmermann@physik.rwth-aachen.de>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:25:23 +0200
Cc: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Message-id: <C21F9514-2C21-4A96-A682-CED84F1ED341@physik.rwth-aachen.de>
To: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>

Am 12.10.2010 um 09:23 schrieb Alex Danilo:

> Hi Niko & Shane,
>
> 	Now I see the difference, child relationships.
>
> 	Anyway see inline:
>
> --Original Message--:
>> Hi Shane,
>>
>> I think you are misunderstanding something:
>>
>>>   <path d="M-25,-12.5 L25,-12.5 L 0,-87.5 z" fill="yellow"
>>> stroke="red" stroke-width="7.06" id="MyTriangle" >
>>>   </path>
>>>    <animateMotion dur="6s" repeatCount="indefinite" rotate="auto" >
>>>      <mpath xlink:href="#path1"/>
>>>    </animateMotion>
>>
>> This example is not correct, how shall the user agent know to which
>> element the animation should be applied?
>> It works as expected if you'd assign xlink:href="#MyTriangle" to your
>> <animateMotion> element.
>
> The animateMotion should be applied to the parent element which in
> that case is the <svg>. Since that's a container element all the
> content should have the animateMotion applied. So the example is OK.

Hehe, now that was stupid, I should have had my coffee before  
mailing :-)
But I'm still questioning wheter it's valid as SVGSVGElement is not  
SVGTransformable, but only SVGLocatable.
So shall it be possible to apply transforms to SVG using SMIL  
animations, but not through <svg transform=".."

Cheers,
Niko
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2010 07:25:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:46 GMT