- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:36:35 -0700
- To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Cc: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de> wrote: > Dirk Schulze: >> On Apr 29, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de> > wrote: >> > .. to continue this chain of arguments, irregular star like shapes are >> > pretty common as well, but not covered by Paul LeBeaus proposal. >> > Maybe people belonging to nations with regular stars in their flags >> > (and with a stronger relationship to those kinds of symbols) >> > are more focussed on these regular shapes, if they talk about 'star', but >> > others will be surprised, that the proposal does not cover some other >> > kinds of popular stars. >> >> Thankfully this represents at least 850 million people (EU, US and >> Australia alone). > China as well ... > >> >> Please avoid any kind of judgement of people on this list. >> >> Greetings, >> Dirk > > I cannot see any jugdement here, there is just a relation between > logos and shapes people are familiar with and their nation and culture. > If you have an association of judgement to these shapes or their use, > this is bad (unfortunately logos and symbols are often abused to > discriminate people, this should be avoided) - > I prefer tolerance, there is nothing bad in preferring regular or irregular > stars, both is ok, this is the core idea of this statement ;o) Irregular stars can't be handled in any meaningfully simpler way than just using a <path> in any case, so this entire tangent is irrelevant. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2014 17:37:24 UTC