Re: Handling of orient="auto" markers

On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 3:04 AM, Paul LeBeau <paul.lebeau@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've put up a document showing the current problems with orient=auto markers
> here:
>
> http://paullebeau.com/svg2/markers/
>
> At the bottom of that page is a copy of my proposed clarifications to the
> SVG 2 spec. It is a slightly expanded version of what I had in my first
> email.

We've accepted your idea for an orient value that's the reverse of
"auto" for start markers.

Your examples aren't very clear on some points, because the markers
are fully opaque, so we can't tell if there's overpainting or not.

We've accepted that closed subpaths should only have mid markers, even
if they contain the first/last point in the element.  We've rejected
the suggestion that start/end markers should be applied per subpath,
because it seems likely to be too inconsistent with existing content
(though we're open to accepting it if a convincing argument can be
made that existing content won't be too broken).

We've accepted that rect/circle/ellipse should have markers: rect
starts at the left point of the top straight edge and goes clockwise,
making 8 segments; circle/ellipse start at the rightmost point and
make 4 quarter-arcs going clockwise.

~TJ

Received on Monday, 3 June 2013 02:35:34 UTC