- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 10:08:16 -0700
- To: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
- Cc: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com> wrote: > On 30 September 2016 at 10:09, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote: >> But what if we reversed the terms? >> >> >> path-transform (shorthand) >> path-transform-shape (= motion-path / offset-path) >> path-transform-anchor (=offset-anchor) >> path-transform-offset (= offset-position) >> path-transform-distance (= offset-distance) >> path-transform-rotation (=motion-rotation / offset-rotation) >> > This was going to be my second choice suggestion, so I'd be happy with it. > Saves a few characters, anyway. We had for a while discussed using a `path` > property for SVG path data, but ended up sticking with `d` in the spec, so I > think the path-* prefix is safe. At this point, why not just drop the "-transform" entirely? "path" as the shorthand, "path-shape", "path-distance", etc for the longhands. No need to have those extra 10 characters cluttering up the names. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 30 September 2016 17:09:04 UTC