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

Re: <animateMotion> specification clarification

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 21:28:49 +1300
To: Nikolas Zimmermann <zimmermann@physik.rwth-aachen.de>
Cc: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20101012082849.GA9138@wok.mcc.id.au>
Alex Danilo:
> > 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.

Nikolas Zimmermann:
> 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=".."

The spec does state in
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/animate.html#AnimationAttributesAndProperties
that <svg> is a valid target of <animateMotion>.  Whether it makes sense
for <svg> elements not to be transformable is something I’ve wondered
for a while.

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2010 08:29:39 GMT

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