- From: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 22:51:34 +1000
- To: Jasper van de Gronde <th.v.d.gronde@hccnet.nl>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
Hi Jasper, Yes good point. This is what the HP GL/2 clipped mitre behaviour was back in the '90s as well. Alex --Original Message--: >On 10-04-13 02:58, Cameron McCormack wrote: >> ... >> Changes since the previous draft can be seen highlighted in yellow in >> the Changes appendix: >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-SVG2-20130409/changes.html >> >> Comments to this mailing list are welcome. > >With regards to how to handle miter limit for "arcs" joins, why not >simply cap the arcs at at the miter limit? So you don't revert to either >bevel or miter, but as soon as the arcs become longer than the miter >limit (either in arc-length, or in terms of the distance between >starting and ending points) you cut them off and draw a straight line >between the two endpoints. > >The main advantage is that you don't have discontinuous behaviour. As >the join gets larger and larger you don't suddenly snap back to either a >bevel or miter, but the join is simply cut off beyond the miter limit. >Also, it's hardly more difficult to falling back to different behaviour. > >(The same could be used for miter joins btw.) > > >
Received on Wednesday, 10 April 2013 12:52:18 UTC