- From: Brian Birtles <birtles@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:33:44 +0900
- To: Cyril Concolato <Cyril.Concolato@cisra.canon.com.au>, 'www-svg' <www-svg@w3.org>
Hi Cyril, Thanks for your mail! (2012/02/27 8:04), Cyril Concolato wrote: >> cursor -> <cursor> > > We've discussed this one in the previous SVG WG call (see http://www.w3.org/2012/02/23-svg-minutes.html#item01). Since CSS is adding x and y to the cursor property, SVG might deprecate the<cursor> element. Sounds fine to me. >> If it's 'child', it means "find the first child element that is a<clipPath> and use >> that." > > Somehow I think it's better if the child references the parent, than the other way round. Yes, the direction of the links differs between elements. For animations, the direction is animation -> target. But for filters, it's filter <- target. That makes sense since, until now, animations are single-use but filters can be used multiple times. In the future, of course, we want animations to be re-usable so that distinction starts to break down. Do you have any particular reason for preferring the link going from child to parent rather than the other way around? Brian
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 07:34:19 UTC