- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:24:50 -0800
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote: > On 24/01/13 5:54 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> This leaves us with the following list of attributes being promoted to >> properties: >> >> cx, cy, dx, dy, fx, fy, height, width, offset, r, rx, ry, x, x1, x2, >> y, y1, y2 and maybe d >> >> (d is a harder one - I *really* want it, but the syntax isn't >> compatible with CSS right now, and would require a reparse step to >> make it meaningful - for example, the valid path string "M0,0h1v1h1v1" >> produces three tokens in the CSS parser - IDENT(M0) COMMA DIMENSION(0, >> h1v1h1v1). Are we interested in pursuing a more CSS-compatible syntax >> for path data? Please say yes - I *really* want to be able to use >> units in path data, as I was *just* working on something made harder >> and uglier by that lack.) > > I think from an authoring point of view it just makes sense to allow units > in d="" (and in points="" on <polygon> and <polyline>). If d="" it to > eventually become a property, we should indeed consider a syntax that fits > in with CSS better. Last year we discussed having longer names for some of > the new path commands, since the available Latin letters for them are > obscure. Maybe these new long names should only be available in this new > CSS-friendly syntax? (The presentation attribute could continue to accept > the existing syntax but also the new syntax, if we design it right.) Ah, that's probably a good idea. And yeah, I think it shouldn't be hard to make them distinguishable. I might work on this today. >> The only issue is still that of collisions between attributes with the >> same name but different values, such as "x" on <rect> and <text>. We >> can't reject mismatches at parse-time, like we usually do, because you >> can't tell whether it's wrong until you try to apply it. There are a >> few ways to resolve this: >> >> 1. If the wrong syntax is used on a given element, treat it like an >> invalid variables, and just use the initial value for the property. > > 1a. Use the first value of 'x' on <rect> and ignore any subsequent values. Ah yeah, that's probably the best option for that collision. Are the other collisions similarly resolveable? ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2013 18:25:37 UTC