W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > February 2014

Re: Bearing path command

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 12:23:40 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBW-=8k7YL-b5C=QqOBxF3bUwCEwei2wTrn2R7Yc6rh6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul LeBeau <paul.lebeau@gmail.com>
Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Paul LeBeau <paul.lebeau@gmail.com> wrote:
> It occurs to me that there is a side-effect to bearing that may be
> undesirable.
> At present you can append two independent paths safely and know that each
> subpath will remain the same.  However that won't be the case with bearing
> as it is defined now.
> In order for a user or a program to safely append two paths, a "B 0" will
> now need to be inserted between them.  If the user is trying to stick to
> relative commands, then the first path will have to be analysed to determine
> the bearing in effect at the end of the path and a counter-acting bearing
> inserted.

"Sticking to relative commands" makes sense for the ones that are
relative to a position, but extending that policy to doing only
relative bearing doesn't make sense.  If you want your subpath to
start at a null bearing, just use "B0".

Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 20:24:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:35 UTC