W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2017

Re: [paint] Publishing FPWD of Fill and Stroke Module

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 14:46:53 +0000
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, public-fx <public-fx@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FB95C88E-74FC-432E-B89F-6FA8E905E390@adobe.com>
Hi fantasai,

I wonder if the SVG specific paint properties should go in into the first draft. I am not sure if there is interest from browser vendors to still implement them.

Also, I wonder how https://svgwg.org/specs/strokes/ is aligning with the the Fill and Stroke Module. Should it get the 2nd level? Should it get integrated into the editors draft of Fill and Stroke?

Adobe Illustrator is able to mix fill and strokes. This would not be possible with this draft and I wonder how this could be supported in the future if we allow layered fills and stroke as specified.

Greetings,
Dirk

On 16. Mar 2017, at 00:31, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net<mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>> wrote:

Tab and I just wrapped up the last remaining edits from the Sydney F2F last year
 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Mar/0358.html
where we were asked to merge the spec with heycam's Strokes module. (Most of the
edits went in last August, but we dropped the ball on wrapping them up and asking
for publication, sorry.)

The draft is here:
 https://drafts.fxtf.org/paint/
We think it is ready for FPWD.

Note that there are a lot of issues:
 https://drafts.fxtf.org/paint/#issues-index
This is okay. The point of FPWD is to say "we've got a a good rough draft of the
module and are ready to ask for broader input", not "this is ready for implementation".
(But we should probably discuss them all at some point, too.)

If this is a topic that interests you, please have a look at the draft and let us know if
 * there is anything we forgot to add to the spec
 * there is a particular issue you absolutely want to resolve before FPWD
 * there are other issues that aren't noted in the spec or in github
 * you're OK with FPWD

(We would also love it if anyone wants to send us a list of "Here are my preferred
answers to all the open questions in the spec" as there are rather a lot.)

Also, I'm proposing to mark this as Level 3 (post-SVG2) and Tab wants to mark it
as Level 1 (first level after modularization), so we'll have to get a resolution
on that, too. >:]

~fantasai and TJ
Received on Friday, 2 June 2017 14:47:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:07 UTC