- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 10:35:18 +0100
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Tab Atkins Jr.: >> >> Thanks for the update Tab > >> > We've rejected >> > the suggestion that start/end markers should be applied per subpath, >> > because it seems likely to be too inconsistent with existing content >> >> I appreciate the desire for backwards compatibility. I expected that this >was likely going to the most controversial proposal. >> >> I still think it is a reasonable suggestion, but I suspect any arguments >for it will have to be based on emotion. I'm not sure if any real survey of >marker use is possible unless someone like the Chrome or Firefox teams >volunteer to put in some metering. I would be open to suggestions on how to >otherwise conduct a survey on marker usage. Given the number of rendering >bugs I have found, and that few people seem to have noticed, my sense is >that usage of markers is at a level of rarity that it would have little >impact if the semantics changed. > >Yeah, I'm not sure what would be convincing. :/ One could add a new property/attribute to leave it to the author. The default value should be the current behaviour, with other values one could provide a fine adjustment. By the way, related missing options to adjust the behaviour applies for example for stroke-linecap and stroke-dasharray as well. Such a collection of properties/attributes is an important help for authors. Currently they have to decompose everything into single paths to get the control - what can result in a lot of additional work - and sometimes in undesired artefacts, because a group of paths does not always result in the same presentation as a single path with a lot of subpaths. Olaf
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 09:35:49 UTC