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

Re: What should the bbox of a path without a d attribute be?

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 16:32:15 +0000
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
CC: Nikos Andronikos <nikos.andronikos@cisra.canon.com.au>, Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>, "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D33555CF-17CE-406E-B8BA-673E6EACE85E@adobe.com>

On Feb 27, 2014, at 5:59 AM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote:

> Cameron McCormack wrote:
>> Nikos Andronikos wrote:
>>> My suggestion would change the meaning of d="" to the equivalent of
>>> d="M0,0", and d=none would no longer exist.
>>> d="L100 100" would also be valid as the "M0,0" would be inserted
>>> automatically.
>>> In all these cases
>>> * the path would render
>>> * the path would contribute to ancestor's bounding box (unless rendering
>>> disabled via display:none or something)
>>> 
>>> But I hadn't thought about the requirement that d="" disables rendering.
>>> This means my suggestion would not be backwards compatible and so
>>> probably needs to be discarded.
>> 
>> Yes I don't think we should do this, for that reason; we should make
>> markers suddenly render at (0,0) when you write <path d=""/> or <path/>.
> 
> *shouldn't make
> 

I agree here, invalid path, <path/> and <path d=“”/> should not render and not contribute to the ancestors bounding boxes. I did not review model E and D in detail. Given that most implementations and the spec use one of the two models, we should stick to one of the two.

Greetings,
Dirk
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2014 16:32:45 UTC

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