- From: Philippe Lhoste <PhiLho@GMX.net>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:20:50 +0100
- CC: www-svg@w3c.org
Scooter Morris wrote:
> My overall comment is that while it is clear that there is a lot of
> work that went into this specification, it seems very complicated and
> not well suited for implementation within an existing browser. As I
> said before, perhaps that is a secondary audience, which is fine, I'm
> frankly having enough trouble with implementing my little piece of SVG
> 1.1 in Mozilla (did gradients /really/ have to be able to refer to other
> gradients?!? Sheesh!)
Just a note: my first real (non trivial) SVG image is a clock (how
original ;-)) with some gradients.
Even as a newbie, I found natural to write:
<linearGradient id="ClockGrad">
<stop offset="0%" stop-color="#CCF"/>
<stop offset="100%" stop-color="#224"/>
</linearGradient>
<linearGradient id="LinGradO" xlink:href="#ClockGrad"
x1="0" y1="0" x2="1" y2="1"/>
<linearGradient id="LinGradI" xlink:href="#ClockGrad"
x1="1" y1="1" x2="0" y2="0"/>
Ie. use a same gradient, in two opposite directions.
I like it, it is powerful and concise.
Now, as would be implementor, I understand it can be found hard to get
around... That, and a lot of other spec. points.
--
Philippe Lhoste
-- (near) Paris -- France
-- Professional programmer and amateur artist
-- http://Phi.Lho.free.fr
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2004 09:23:06 UTC