- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2019 18:34:17 +0000
- To: public-svg-issues@w3.org
> I do agree that we should avoid also having a mid-marker at that position. Wait, re-read some of the comments: looks like you're arguing that we *should* have a mid-marker at that position, so that you could mark up a basic shape with `marker-mid` only & have it do the sensible thing. That's actually a more interesting idea. One argument in favour of segment-completing closepath curves (in general, not just in basic shape equivalent paths) was to avoid weird marker orientation issues from the zero-length straight closepath segment. But the way the spec now defines how to figure out the orientation, that shouldn't be an issue (you're supposed to skip the zero-length segment and continue on until you can find a segment with a meaningful direction). The other argument for segment-completing closepath is numeric precision: what if the end-point of your curve doesn't *exactly* match your start path, because of absolute vs relative or because of bearing commands. But that's not an issue for equivalent paths of basic shapes, where all coordinates are being calculated by the user agent. -- GitHub Notification of comment by AmeliaBR Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/753#issuecomment-560141433 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 1 December 2019 18:34:19 UTC