- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:53:50 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 10/16/13 1:46 PM, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >On 10/09/2013 11:33 AM, Alan Stearns wrote: >> >> And this would introduce a dissimilarity between how percentages are >> handled on x,y arguments in rectangle() versus how they are handled >> in polygon() > >Well, polygon() is a series of points, whereas rectangle() is a size >and a position. So I don't this concern is valid. If you're looking >for a rectangle function that works like polygon(), then you want >rect(): it is two pairs of coordinates defining a rectangle, just >as polygon() is multiple pairs of coordinates defining a polygon. > >Does that make sense? A while back you had brought up the possibility of the first x,y coordinate in polygon specifying a <position> that the rest of the x,y points were relative to. I was assuming that would be the start of a CSS-style shape(polygon ...) function, and that the use of <position> there could be made consistent with a CSS-style shape(rectangle ...) function. Thanks, Alan
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2013 20:54:22 UTC