- 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