On Monday, 11 March, 2002, 22:28:43, Thomas wrote: >>>>>> "JD" == Jeremy E Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JD>> The additions from 1.1 to 1.5b are great. I've been exploring JD>> them and it really great to see. The only thing that confounds me JD>> is that there doesn't seem to be support for changing basic JD>> attribute values like fill or stroke. I mean one of the most JD>> basic and common uses for scripting in SVG is changing the colour JD>> of an object as the mouse passes over it. Anyone know if there is JD>> a reason for this? TED> There is a reason for this. These are in fact CSS properties they TED> are not actually XML attributes :) Well to be less mysterious they *are* of course XML attributes, but what those attributes do is contribute to the eventual computed value of the identically-named CSS property which is also influenced by internal and external style sheets, style attributes, and the users own style sheet. TED> When you use 'fill="black"' you are TED> actually changing a 'presentation attribute' which is transparently TED> converted to a zero specificity CSS rule (I'm not a CSS head so if the TED> wording is off a bit please don't shoot me). Its spot on. Relax. TED> The end result is that these 'basic' things are _very_ hard to do TED> correctly and efficently in animation (consider changing a fill on a TED> 'g' must then cascade down to it's children). To properly support TED> them we are in the processes of completely rewriting the current CSS TED> engine. Whoopee! Yes, there are a bunch of optimizations that can be made, no doubt. JD>> Anyway of getting around it? TED> Only really ugly ways (like cloning the node changing the TED> presentation attribute and replacing the original with the new one). I would add 'download Batik 1.5 non beta' -- Chris mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
