Re: Rendering of marker-start at the beginning of a subpath

There should be a way to orient marker on sub paths.

One way is to not use sub paths, for filled paths with holes this may not
be an option.


On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Paul LeBeau <paul.lebeau@gmail.com> wrote:

> Then the paragraph says "One way to prevent this is to set ‘marker-end’ to
> none". Which a reader could easily interpret to mean it is talking about
> start and end.
>
> When you are totally familiar with what specification intends to say, the
> meaning of a sentence can be clear.  On the other hand, when you are
> reading it for the first time, and trying to parse intention from just a
> few sentences, it can be easy to misinterpret the correct behaviour.  Hence
> the different implementations that the OP pointed out.
>
> I should not have replied to the email when I was tired because I ended up
> making that mistake myself.  My apologies to you, Regina.
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> On 27 September 2013 03:13, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>wrote:
>
>> Paul LeBeau:
>> > That's the sentence I was referring to in my post.  That is later
>> seemingly
>> > contradicted (or clarified?) by the paragraph I posted.  It tends to
>> > suggest that it may have been intended that start and end markers
>> applied
>> > to all subpaths.
>>
>> Do you mean sentences in the same paragraph:
>> "Note that for a 'path' element which ends with a closed sub-path, the
>> last
>> vertex is the same as the initial vertex on the given sub-path. In this
>> case,
>> if 'marker-end' does not equal none, then it is possible that two markers
>> will be rendered on the given vertex."
>>
>> I cannot see a contradiction (nevertheless, the usage of 'sub-path' can
>> be a little bit confusing, but logically it does not cause a problem
>> together
>> with the initial definition), it only notes, that it is possible, that
>> this
>> happens.  This does not implicate a specific behaviour for sub-paths.
>> I clarifies basically, that closed paths have an initial and final point
>> as
>> other paths and not just one for both.
>> The Z-command implicates, that the initial point of the sub-path
>> is the same as the final (and implicates something for some
>> stroke-properties as well, but obviously not for markers - but
>> currently one cannot have different linecaps at the begin or end of
>> the path anyway and if closed the linejoin applies instead).
>> Now there can be four different cases (assuming different markers
>> for begin, end and mid):
>> a) The initial point of the sub-path is the initial point of
>> the complete path and the final point of the sub-path is
>> the final point of the complete path - in this case, the markers for begin
>> and end are drawn at the same vertex.
>> b) The initial point of the sub-path is not the initial point of
>> the complete path and the final point of the sub-path is
>> the final point of the complete path - in this cae, a marker for mid and
>> end are drawn at the same vertex.
>> c) The initial point of the sub-path is the initial point of
>> the complete path and the final point of the sub-path is
>> not the final point of the complete path - in this case, a marker for
>> begin and mid are drawn at the same vertex.
>> d) The initial point of the sub-path is not the initial point of
>> the complete path and the final point of the sub-path is
>> not the final point of the complete path - in this case,
>> two mid markers have a coincidence - because they are
>> of the same type, nothing interesting will result from
>> this.
>>
>> Olaf
>>
>
>


-- 
*Morality is doing what is right regardless of what you are told.
*
*Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
*
*
*