On Thursday, October 4, 2007, 2:53:19 AM, Jon wrote:
JAC> On Oct 3, 2007, at 3:13 PM, bulia byak wrote:
JAC> On 10/3/07, microUgly <drworm@...1743...> wrote: JAC> JAC> It was just revealed to me a method of creating a gradient with one stop for JAC> JAC> the purpose of being able to change flat colour of multiple objects easily JAC> JAC> (http://www.inkscapeforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=248#p1362), and now that JAC> JAC> trick is void. JAC>
JAC> Well, you're calling it a trick yourself. Which is exactly what it is. JAC> JAC> Every feature must be intuitive and easy to discover and explain. This JAC> JAC> one was not. It was very non-obvious, with high surprise factor, and JAC> JAC> very difficult to explain in documentation. We take usability JAC> JAC> seriously. Even if we're to reenable this feature, its UI must be JAC> JAC> reworked completely so it's always painfully obvious what I'm going to JAC> JAC> change. JAC>
JAC> Actually it's not so much of a "trick" as it is a design intent JAC> of SVG 1.1, just one that was poorly communicated.
Yes.
From a spec-writing perspective, its a logical result that comes from
having to explain how a gradient should render if it has only one stop defined. Much more useful to say that it gives a solid color than say 'you must have a miimum of two stops defined else your gradient has no effect'.
From an authoring perspective, its counter intuitive (and in fact I
more often see people defining a gradient with two stops, and 0 and 100%, with the same color).
This is why SVG 1.2 added the solidColor element - its a sharable paint server that defines a single solid color. http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/painting.html#SolidColorElement works just the same as a gradient with a single stop, without the need to specify things (unit space, pad method, etc) that do affect a multicolor gradient but can't affect a single solid color.
(incidentally that also solves the commonly requested feature of 'user named colors').