Is this an acceptable way of cloning <symbol> into <use> trees?
Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings. |
Is this an acceptable way of cloning <symbol> into <use> trees?
I can't say that I'm a fan of "magic casting". Could we consider a structure where the relevant bits of `SVGSVGElement` is moved to a base-class where we can share it between `<svg>` and `<symbol>` instead?
Fredrik SöderquistIs this an acceptable way of cloning <symbol> into <use> trees?
I can't say that I'm a fan of "magic casting". Could we consider a structure where the relevant bits of `SVGSVGElement` is moved to a base-class where we can share it between `<svg>` and `<symbol>` instead?
I'll try that.
Thought the SVGGraphicsElement inheritance would be a problem, but according to the SVG2 spec, SVGSymbolElement should inherit from it too (we don't in our current impl).