Hello,
I have created the following test case to illustrate the drift that occurs in my path definition, using svg-arc-to-cubic-bezier to transform arcs to cubic curves.
<script src="./svg-arc-to-cubic-bezier.js"></script>
<!-- <script src="./a2c.js"></script> -->
You can switch between this package and the one below, which is the function used in Snap.svg/SVGO. You will see that both paths are visually identical when using the latter. But it returns relative values and I needed absolute ones so I gave your function a shot.
I didn't change the functions signatures. I just added a utility to concat the returned cubic points into a string. I tested your function with a very simple arc and it works perfectly.
Are you aware of some corner cases/bugs/limitations with the maths involved in svg-arc-to-cubic-bezier? Would you be interested to get a feed back if I implement the function from Snap.svg/SVGO by returning absolute values?
EDIT: I implemented it here. But I'm still interested to check and learn about the maths involved here... someday.
Hello,
I have created the following test case to illustrate the drift that occurs in my path definition, using
svg-arc-to-cubic-bezierto transform arcs to cubic curves.You can switch between this package and the one below, which is the function used in Snap.svg/SVGO. You will see that both paths are visually identical when using the latter. But it returns relative values and I needed absolute ones so I gave your function a shot.
I didn't change the functions signatures. I just added a utility to concat the returned cubic points into a string. I tested your function with a very simple arc and it works perfectly.
Are you aware of some corner cases/bugs/limitations with the maths involved in
svg-arc-to-cubic-bezier? Would you be interested to get a feed back if I implement the function from Snap.svg/SVGO by returning absolute values?EDIT: I implemented it here. But I'm still interested to check and learn about the maths involved here... someday.