- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 16:17:36 -0700
- To: Jürg Lehni <lists@scratchdisk.com>
- Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Jürg Lehni <lists@scratchdisk.com> wrote: > On Apr 9, 2013, at 14:52 , Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It is not too late. Someone started the implementation on Firefox but it > > stalled. [1] > > The Webkit implementation is behind a compile time flag so it can still > > change. > > Great! > > > The intent is that we can use this object with SVG as well so we would > like > > to avoid prefixing it with 'Canvas'. > > That makes a lot of sense. A similar issue exists with SVGMatrix, which > apparently is going to be used for Canvas too. > We are working on a new matrix class [1] that can do 2d as well as 3d. > > > Can you think of another prefix so people don't assume that shape and > path > > are specific to canvas? > > Why not prefixing everything with Graphics, or suffixing with 2D? > > Path, Shape, Gradient, Matrix all seem way too generic, and will > definitely clash with many libraries. It was pointed out before that Path > could also be a object describing a file path, not necessarily a (2D) > gemoetric path. > > I like the following naming scheme, as it is really short and already > familiar for people from the Java world, but I can imagine that a prefix > would be preferred. > > Path2D, Shape2D, Gradient2D, Matrix2D > Path2d and Shape2d sound reasonable. I don't think there's a immediate need to harmonize gradients so we probably want to keep CanvasGradient. 1: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/raw-file/tip/matrix/index.html
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2013 23:18:01 UTC