- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:22:10 -0400
- To: Dirk Schulze <vbs85@gmx.de>
- CC: Rick <graham.rick@gmail.com>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On 21/10/11 3:06 PM, Dirk Schulze wrote: > If we think about renaming SVG Objects in the SVG DOM, we could > rethink the complete concept of SVG DOM. I'd love to replace some SVG > Objects / Unit types by corresponding CSS Object / units like > SVGMatrix, SVGLength, SVGTransform and so on. They were useful in the > past, but CSS improved a lot in the meantime and can take > functionality over. That would also help supporting CSS Transitions / > Animations with several SVG attributes. But it would definitely break > backward compatibility! Every renaming would break backward > compatibility! I am not convinced that all renamings we could possibly do would break backward compatibility. Renaming SVGPathSegCurveToQuadraticAbs? I would be very surprised if anyone was messing with SVGPathSegCurveToQuadraticAbs.prototype, for example. As part of improving the SVG DOM -- and I do think we should try to do this -- maybe renaming is not the answer, but introducing parallel, more useful and usable APIs. >>> var p = new SVGPathElement( string ); > That would work. But don't we support it anyway by setting the 'd' > attribute via normal DOM? Yes, so it would just be a (slight) convenience. Maybe unnecessary with the proposed DOM Core improvements being discussed on public-webapps/www-dom.
Received on Friday, 21 October 2011 19:22:49 UTC