W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > June 2017


From: Domenico Strazzullo <strazzullo.domenico@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 09:59:13 +0200
Message-ID: <712CDE0220F54BF39ECF1E84AC76E7BA@RAPAXTO>
To: "www-svg" <www-svg@w3.org>
This is constructive, as opposed to your previous comment on CSS animations.

Your finding is a perfect example of how it is well worth exploring deeply the spec before drawing erroneous conclusions about capabilities. SVG 1.1 was written by people with great expertise in the domain, and there are so many subjects that one can easily overlook.

I take the opportunity to point out that back in time there used to be a knowledge chain where in a case like this one or more solutions would be promptly proposed by those who had already dealt with a particular problem. Others would jump into experimenting. Anyone knew what others were doing , or, more important, had already done.

In your particular example, if you needed an indefinite number of elements, an animated pattern would also be very concise.
Received on Saturday, 10 June 2017 08:00:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:09 UTC