- From: Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 14:17:17 +0200
- To: anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au, public-svg-wg@w3.org
On Mon, 04 May 2009 10:11:13 +0200, Anthony Grasso <anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au> wrote: ... > Tighten up the implicit lineto commands in the path syntax > > <heycam> ISSUE-2268? > > <trackbot> ISSUE-2268 -- Tighten up the implicit lineto commands in > the path syntax -- RAISED > > <trackbot> [13]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2268 > > [13] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2268 > > <heycam> DS: I think there are two sensible answers to this > > <heycam> ... one, they're always absolute > > <heycam> ... (or relative, but absolute makes more sense) > > <heycam> ED: i tested a few implementations > > <heycam> ... if you have a relative 'm', then you have relative 'l's > > <heycam> ... and if you have an absolute 'M', then you have absolute > 'L's > > <heycam> DS: that's the second sensible one > > CM: Erik, you were saying that the first line to is absolute? > > ED: Even if it's lower case 'm' it will be absolute > > CM: All the subsequent implicit line-to's > > ED: That's what the test cases showed > > CM: I guess that makes sense > ... You can always not use implicit lines if you want particular > behavior > > ED: I couldn't find any implementation that behaved differently > ... but I didn't test ASV > > DS: Implementations, the first 'm' whether capital is not is always > absolute then everything after is absolute > ... need to have a lower case 'm' after the first to make line-to > commands relative > > CM: Are we going to errata this for 1.1F and 1.2T? > > ED: Yes we should > > <scribe> ACTION: Anthony to Create an errata of the implicit line to > problem mentioned on the list [recorded in > [14]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action01] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-2542 - Create an errata of the implicit > line to problem mentioned on the list [on Anthony Grasso - due > 2009-05-11]. My memory was a bit hazy there (the inverse of what was claimed in the telcon seems to hold though): - implicit lineto commands will be relative if the moveto is relative, and absolute if the moveto is absolute. - if the first moveto in @d is relative the implicit lineto's will be relative even though the moveto will be interpreted as an absolute moveto Sorry for the confusion. Simple testcase: <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" stroke="black" viewBox="0 0 50 50"> <g stroke="none" fill="blue"> <circle cx="30" cy="10" r="2"/> <circle cx="30" cy="20" r="2"/> <circle cx="30" cy="30" r="2"/> <circle cx="30" cy="40" r="2"/> </g> <g stroke="none" fill="lime"> <circle cx="20" cy="10" r="2"/> <circle cx="20" cy="20" r="2"/> <circle cx="20" cy="30" r="2"/> <circle cx="20" cy="40" r="2"/> </g> <g text-anchor="middle" font-size="2" stroke="none"> <text x="20" y="5">Absolute</text> <text x="30" y="5">Relative</text> </g> <path d="m10 10 20 0" /> <path d="m0 0m10 20 20 0" /> <path d="M10 30 20 30" /> <path d="M0 0M10 40 20 40" /> </svg> -- Erik Dahlstrom, Core Technology Developer, Opera Software Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Personal blog: http://my.opera.com/macdev_ed
Received on Monday, 4 May 2009 12:16:05 UTC