- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 16:39:17 +0200
- To: j.chetwynd@btinternet.com, www-svg@w3.org
Hello, from my personal point of view, this is a matter of taste, if it is not handled as an opaque object, one needs another attribute or property to allow authors to define, at which fraction of opacity the object cannot receive any events anymore, see for example the SMIL3 draft: http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-SMIL3-20070713/smil-extended-media-object.html#smilMediaNS-MediaOpacity Well, the opaque glass plate methaphor fits to the current behaviour, the thickness not, thats the reason, why I choose it ;o) And to be fussy with the methaphor of thickness - if there is still an SiO2 around somewhere, if there is some dust or sand around, the thickness cannot really assumed to be completely zero ;o) On the other hand, you will already manage to grab through it, if it is very thin, a mono-layer of atoms/molecules or something, therefore an additional attribute or property is required for this methaphor to decide, when you are able to grab through it, as it is specified in the SMIL 3 draft. Concerning opacity and animation it would be a little bit surprising, if an object can receive events for opacity in the range (0,1] and only for 0 it cannot receive any events? Why not to choose: [0, 0.03141) no events and for [0.03141, 1] events possible? I think to say it can receive events for any opacity value simplifies the situation for implementors, they do not have to look for details or have to imagine sophisticated methaphors, especially within an animation. And for authors it is no problem to add an additional set animation for pointer-events or in the case of opacity 0 for display to 'remove' the object completely. This set animation can be timed with the opacity animation too with syncbase values. Therefore I cannot see that this restricts my possibilities as authors to realise what I need. The method as introduced in the SMIL3 draft is clearly an improvement for authors of SMIL3, but not really important for SVG 1.1, because there are (several) other possibilities to get a similar effect and to decide which object in a stack will receive an event at which time... > > there are many possible similes but why chose the opacity of a glass > plate? > why not it's thickness for instance? > > No one has so far contributed a use case, where this behaviour is > essential or even desirable, whereas the uses of the contrary > position seem natural, as for instance fading linked images... > > regards > > Jonathan Chetwynd >
Received on Friday, 3 August 2007 14:45:13 UTC