Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Snap.svg vs Paths.js, the Slant community recommends Snap.svg for most people. In the question“What are the best JavaScript drawing libraries?” Snap.svg is ranked 7th while Paths.js is ranked 21st.
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Pure SVG library
Pro Written by a SVG Guru and pioneer
Dmitry Baranovskiy also wrote Raphael (project now owned by Sencha), this is the updated modern version of that library. Dmitry also is a champion directly affecting the future of SVG standards with W3C
Pro Backed by Adobe
Adobe is backing the development of snap.svg
Pro Features
Supports the newest SVG features like masking, clipping, patterns, full gradients, groups, and more
Pro Just helps building graphs, complements template engines or data-binding libraries
Can be used together with a template engine such as Mustache or Handlebars to display SVG graphics or instead of a static template engine, you can use a data binding or MVC/MV* library, such as Ractive.js, Angular, Mithril or Facebook React.
Pro 3 APIs for the price of one
3 APIs of increasing abstraction:
- Low-level (svg paths)
- Basic shapes (Polygon, Rectangle, Bezier, Sector, Connector etc..)
- Basic graphs (Pie, bar, stock, radar, tree, waterfall, sankey etc...)
There is no magic, you can have as much control as you want on how you define your graphs, source code very readable.
Pro Lightweight
18kb minified.
Cons
Con Not actively developed
During 2016 was few updates, more updates in 2017
Con Spotty exporting
Exporting doesn't work well (if at all sometimes) with SVGs exported from anything other than Adobe products.
Con Weak documentation
Explanations provided in the documentation can often be unclear, with some features missing from the documentation all together.
