- From: Andrew Shellshear <Andrew.Shellshear@research.canon.com.au>
- Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:35:16 +1000
- To: www-svg@w3.org, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Bjoern wrote: >* Robin Berjon wrote: >>The absence of the 'transform' attribute on 'animation' was an >>oversight in the schema which has been corrected, and 'textPath' has >>been added to the list of supported elements. Note however that >>supporting the 'transform' attribute and being a target for >>'animateMotion' are orthogonal features. > >I'm not sure where you got the textPath from, perhaps you mean textArea >which I wrote about? It is not clear to me how these are orthogonal, it >seems that now all elements that support transform="" can also be target >of animateTransform which is defined in terms of transformations, please >change the draft such that it is clear how these properties interact >with each other. If it turns out that these properties are not actually >orthogonal, I don't think having such lists is a good idea, it's clear >from the previous draft that the Working Group introduces errors in such >lists. OK, we've removed the list from the animateMotion element, and replaced it with: Any element that can take a transform attribute may have animateMotion applied to it. See the <a href="attributeTable.html#attribute_transform"> transform attribute</a> for a list of these elements. We've added the same text (except s/animateMotion/animateTransform/) to animateTransform, too. Thank you kindly for your thorough review, please let us know if this does not address your concerns. Andrew.
Received on Tuesday, 25 April 2006 09:35:34 UTC