- From: Justin Novosad <junov@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 15:35:47 -0400
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Cc: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I agree. That issue has the same root problem as currentTransform. > It would be nice to get closure. > > Justin, you hinted that you would be willing to follow the spec which > would make you match Firefox and IE. > Are still planning on doing that? > I'm in a holding pattern. I prepared a code change to that effect, but then there was talk of changing the spec to skip path primitives when the CTM is not invertible, which I think is a good idea. It would avoid a lot of needless hoop jumping on the implementation side for supporting weird edge cases that have little practical usefulness. Right now, there is no browser interoperability when using non-invertible CTMs, and the web has been in this inconsistent state for a long time. The fact that this issue has never escalated (AFAIK) is a strong hint that no one out there really cares about this use case, so we should probably just go for simplicity. Maklng path primitives and draw calls no-ops when the CTM is non-invertible is simple to spec, implement, test, and understand for developers. > Note that Firefox is still non-compliant if there's a non-invertible > matrix during filling/stroking/clipping > > >> > PS: This is one reason I prefer a getter over an attribute because the >> > getter does not return a mutable (live) SVGMatrix. But even than the >> > problem above is not fully solved of course. >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2014 19:36:20 UTC