- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 12:02:19 +1200
- To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
- Cc: Vincent Hardy <vhardy@adobe.com>, Dirk Schulze <dirk@dschulze.com>, SVG WG <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
Leonard Rosenthol: > So in this case, the second segment in the examples would NOT render > in existing implementations – and (IMO) that would be BAD (as it's > data loss). I don’t see what the problem is with this. Even if we did have a path syntax error behaviour that meant that the R/F commands ignored and the following segments are still rendered, the shape is going to be wrong. If we want to, we could have a feature string so that authors could have a fallback path using <switch>. -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2011 00:02:59 UTC