- From: Mike Bremford via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2020 11:29:32 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Good point, I didn't knot at! Though SVG markers don't play a role in CSS shapes. Do they? In which case, arcs and curves are interchangeable.
True, currently. But (from https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/119 and https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/320) the "d" property uses the path() function (see also PR https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/pull/374). Although it doesn't yet reference css-shapes, it seems to me that where `path()` applies, `shape()` would always apply too. And this looks pretty good to me:
```svg
<svg>
<style>
path {
d: shape(move to 0 0 arc to 100% 100% cw small 90deg);
marker-start: url(#marker);
marker-end: url(#marker);
}
</style>
<marker id="marker" markerWidth="10" markerHeight="10" refX="5" refY="5">
<circle cx="5" cy="5" r="5"/>
</marker>
<path></path>
</svg>
```
Actually, that's another point - ideally the grammar for "arc" would allow the `radius`, `arc-sweep` `arc-large` and `angle` to be reordered, as this can be done without ambiguity. I _think_ that means it should look like `arc <by-to> <coordinate-pair> [<radius> || <arc-sweep> || <arc-large> || <angle>]`, but don't quote me on that. No doubt these are some of the editorial nits Tab will be picking.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by faceless2
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/5711#issuecomment-737172161 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 2 December 2020 11:30:12 UTC