- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 12:23:40 -0800
- To: Paul LeBeau <paul.lebeau@gmail.com>
- Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Paul LeBeau <paul.lebeau@gmail.com> wrote: > It occurs to me that there is a side-effect to bearing that may be > undesirable. > > At present you can append two independent paths safely and know that each > subpath will remain the same. However that won't be the case with bearing > as it is defined now. > > In order for a user or a program to safely append two paths, a "B 0" will > now need to be inserted between them. If the user is trying to stick to > relative commands, then the first path will have to be analysed to determine > the bearing in effect at the end of the path and a counter-acting bearing > inserted. "Sticking to relative commands" makes sense for the ones that are relative to a position, but extending that policy to doing only relative bearing doesn't make sense. If you want your subpath to start at a null bearing, just use "B0". ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 20:24:28 UTC