On 7/21/16, 11:56 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I’m with you. > >If the transform stuff has too much overhead, I’d do it as a Bead. We’ll >see how it goes… > >Let’s discuss this some more once we’ve done some of this implementation >so there’s something concrete to discuss. Sounds good. IIRC, some of the current design was motivated by some FXG/SVG handling, so keep that in mind as well. I don't have any set opinions on how things end up as long as there is bias towards low overhead in the JS implementations and it is pay-as-you-go. Thanks, -Alex
