- 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