- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 10:29:35 +0100
- To: Thomas.DeWeese@Kodak.com
- Cc: SVG WG <www-svg@w3.org>
Hi Thomas,
On Dec 4, 2008, at 22:52 , Thomas.DeWeese@Kodak.com wrote:
> www-svg-request@w3.org wrote on 12/04/2008 10:43:58 AM:
> > [[
> > 14.3.6 Clipping paths and geometry
> > [...]
> > With regards to pointer-events, while the visible parts of a clipped
> > element receive pointer events normally, parts of a clipped element
> > which are outside the extent of the clipping path must be treated
> as if
> > they have a 'visibility' property value of 'hidden'. Therefore, an
> > element which has 'pointer-events' property values which depend
> upon the
> > visibility of the element (i.e. 'visiblePainted', 'visibleFill',
> > 'visibleStroke', 'visible') will not receive pointer events for the
> > occluded parts of the element.
>
> So does this apply to Mask as well, which has _exactly_ the same
> appearance implications in many cases? If so at what level of
> opacity does the Mask stop transmitting events?
It's not about the appearance implications, display none, visibility
hidden, and opacity 0 all have the same appearance implications but
different semantics, and behave differently. I'd expect mask to work
like opacity, but that's just my personal opinion.
> > We believe that this is the most consistent and predictable
> behavior,
> > and that it should be relatively simple to implement.
>
> It's not very consistent with the mask element. And implementing
> it with mask may not be relatively simple to implement...
In what way is the behaviour not consistent with mask?
> There are of course other cases that have similar issues like
> filters where the actual geometry can be offset from the apparent
> geometry.
>
> My personal opinion is that content authors should handle these
> cases
> with 'hidden' event targets that gives them much more control over the
> behavior they desire.
I don't think that's a very nice solution, it forces people to update
things twice whenever they script or animate. And even if it were a
solution, UAs still need to have properly defined interoperable
behaviour for hit testing in all cases.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Friday, 5 December 2008 09:30:12 UTC