- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 05:14:48 -0800
- To: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
- Cc: "whatwg@lists.whatwg.org" <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Jussi Kalliokoski < > jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Path is also too generic even in the context of graphics. If we later on >> want to add a path object for 3-dimensional paths, you end up with Path >> and >> Path3D? Yay for consistency. Path2D would immediately inform what >> dimensions we're dealing with and also that this is to do with graphics, >> and thus sounds like a good name to me. >> > > Sounds good to me. > Elliot, what do you think, is Path2D acceptable?
Received on Monday, 18 November 2013 13:15:14 UTC