So is currentPath going away then for sure? Will there still be a way to to retrieve a Path2D representation of the path being drawn by the long existing drawing commands on the context?
I quite liked how I could use it for caching, in case the browser supported that feature, and check wether I have a cached path the next time I need to draw it, falling back on redrawing it using the same drawing commands. Doing the same by feature-detecting the Path(2D) constructor and building separate drawing approaches based on its existence results in much more complicated code. J On Mar 14, 2014, at 23:18 , Rik Cabanier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Rik Cabanier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Jürg Lehni <[email protected]> wrote: > I somehow managed to oversee all the things that happened in this discussion, > but I'm very happy to see that Path2D is being proposed and agreed on now. > It's also what I've originally suggested on April 10 this year, and I > completely agree that it leaves much less doubt about its functionality and > context of use. It also has a history as a term in Java2D: > > http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/awt/geom/Path2D.html > > So is this going through? > > Yes, all that need to happen is for someone to implement this :-) > > Path2D has now landed in Blink [1]. Blink also implemented the 'addPath' > method. > WebKit just landed a patch to rename Path to Path2D, remove currentPath and > add fill/stroke/clip with a path [2]. > A patch is under review for Firefox to add Path2D. > > Given this, can we change the spec to reflect the new name? > > 1: https://codereview.chromium.org/178673002/ > 2: https://webkit.org/b/130236 > 3: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=830734 > > > On Nov 18, 2013, at 19:03 , Elliott Sprehn <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Monday, November 18, 2013, Rik Cabanier wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Robert O'Callahan > >> <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> > >>> wrote: > >> > >>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Jussi Kalliokoski < > >>> [email protected] <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', > >>> '[email protected]');>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Path is also too generic even in the context of graphics. If we later on > >>>> want to add a path object for 3-dimensional paths, you end up with Path > >>>> and > >>>> Path3D? Yay for consistency. Path2D would immediately inform what > >>>> dimensions we're dealing with and also that this is to do with graphics, > >>>> and thus sounds like a good name to me. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Sounds good to me. > >>> > >> > >> Elliot, > >> > >> what do you think, is Path2D acceptable? > >> > > > > Sounds great to me, lets do it! > > > > - E > > >
