- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 01:25:55 +0000
- To: public-svg-issues@w3.org
Yes, if transforms are valid for `<tspan>` they should be valid for `<textPath>`. If anything, it's easier to define the transform for `<textPath>`, because it has a self-contained geometry. In contrast, `<tspan>` may use simple inline layout, and may be wrapped to a new line. For CSS/HTML layout, the Transforms spec doesn't allow wrapping inline text to be transformed, so it doesn't define how it behaves. My preference is to just allow transformations on all of them, with the transformation applied after all other text layout. That's actually how it's currently specced, although it's a bit of an unintentional intersection of two different specs: [CSS Transforms says](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-transforms/#transformable-element) that any SVG element that accepts a `transform` attribute is transformable, and [SVG 2 says](https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/styling.html#PresentationAttributes) that `transform` is a valid presentation attribute on any SVG element. If there is an implementation difficulty with transformations on wrapping SVG text spans, we can consider exceptions. But as is, @karip, feel free to file user agent bug reports on anyone that doesn't support transforms on `<tspan>` and `<textPath>`. -- GitHub Notification of comment by AmeliaBR Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/210#issuecomment-233505916 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2016 01:26:11 UTC