- From: Antoine Quint <antoine@graougraou.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 13:49:45 +0100
- To: <svg-developers@yahoogroups.com>
- Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>
Sorry for the cross-posting, but I think this should go to the W3C WG too, although the background of this discussion is probably not sufficient, everyone can have a quick look at an outcome of it. > Robin Berjon wrote: > > > I may just be thinking out loud here, but in order to > conciliate the axiom > > listed above with the possibility or z ordering, couldn't > we create some CSS > > properties along the lines of: z-append-to: url(#otherElement), > > z-insert-before: url(#behindElement), etc. ? These would > make the element > > behave (z-wise) as if it were somewhere else in the tree, > but without > > actually moving it around (hence the names based on the > corresponding DOM > > methods). Wouldn't that allow us to keep the current functioning and > > consistency of the model, without the unavoidable downsides > of destructuring > > the document ? If need be, there could be a few other similar > Chris Lilley wrote: > > Yes, that is an interesting approach and would certainly deal > with some > of the problems of merely adopting the CSS2 z-index property. > > > I'm sure there are issues with this approach, provided it's > feasible at all. > > I'm just looking for a solution to the present quandary. > > I will pass on your suggestion to the working group. Excellent stuff. I think z-index should really be in SVG 1.1. I know it wasn't in the requirements, but I really think SVG 1.1 would be a bit of a miss it did not add support for crucial features missing from SVG 1.0. To be quite honest, I am not really looking forward to SVG 2.0 and would very much prefer to see this sort fo things adressed in SVG 1.1. The thing I anticipate is that SVG 2.0 will not really contain features beneficient enough for the most important masses of users and that in the end it will bloat the language feature-wise and make implementations even harder to come up with. Also, SVG 2.0 seems too far away for me, and I need z-index "now" (well, modulo a year), as I feel others do. I really think with modularization, basic text-wrapping and z-index (plus a few other things that's already in there), SVG 1.1 could be the definite vector graphics spec, at least for a few years. Antoine
Received on Sunday, 25 November 2001 07:51:06 UTC