Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] CSS `shape()` function (Issue #1033)

martinthomson left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1033)

Thanks!  (That link is particularly interesting to me, because I don't like what appears to be a drift between this and SVG.)

On that topic, is there more that you have about why the CSS working group chose to invent an entirely new syntax for what is substantially similar to SVG `<path>`?  It seems to me like you are deliberately losing a bunch of advantages (like being able to prototype shapes using SVG and just copy them over) and inviting the possibility of the two drifting apart.  Without an explainer, there's nowhere that really covers alternatives.

(I'm not 100% sure that this is indeed not an SVG path because the spec says "The rest of the arguments define a list of path data commands, identical to that of an [SVG Path](https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/paths.html#PathData), which the function represents."  It seems not-identical to me, given the level of re-specification.)

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1033#issuecomment-2667994150
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1033/2667994150@github.com>