Re: Rename 'd' property

On 9 February 2016 at 11:27, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> the core disadvantage for renaming something in SVG is, that it is
> backwards
> incompatible to already published viewers and existing content.
> For SVG 2 there is a requirement to avoid any backwards incompatibilities.
>

That's clear. My initial request for renaming only targets the CSS
property, which is, as far as I know, not implemented yet.
In case of wanting both the CSS property and the attribute consistently
named, only aliasing would be a solution.


> And as we all know - there is a certain danger, if implementor get a
> choice to
> do something, this typically results in trouble for authors and the
> audience
> ;-)
>

There wouldn't be a choice for the implementors. They would have to support
both. The choice would be at the authors.


> 'd' is a nice name both for an attribute and a property.
>

So, we obviously have different opinions on this. Again, my argument is
that 'd' is inexpressive, especially when it is defined somewhere else than
at the place where it is used, i.e. as CSS property in a stylesheet instead
of a tag attribute.


> However, it is questionable to define it as a property, just because in
> almost
> any case the information in it is content and not just decoration.
>

That is a good point, though note that the reason for defining it as CSS
property is "because it allows non-SMIL declarative animation of shape
morphing, using CSS animation syntax"[1] and letting it work together with
Web Animations[2].

Sebastian

[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2016Feb/0005.html
[2] https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-svg-irc.html#T23-18-02
<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2016Feb/0005.html>