W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cdf@w3.org > January 2006

Re: [WICD] comments

From: Timur Mehrvarz <timur.mehrvarz@web.de>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:45:09 +0100
Message-Id: <F142237D-919B-470B-9169-E4471EA009CF@web.de>
Cc: public-cdf@w3.org
To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>

Hello Bert.

Thank you for your comments. My brief response to some of your points  

> 2) 3 Scalable Child Elements
> I think the most common presentation of "scalable child elements"  
> is not
> to fit the screen, but to be shown inline in an HTML (or in this case:
> WICD) document. Even if they are shown on their own, a typical  
> computer
> will show them in a window, not full-screen.

What is meant here, is that, scalable child elements (such as SVG  
objects) can always be scaled down enough, to fit fully inside  
whatever destination box (be it a desktop window or the screen of a  
portable device). No scroll bars are ever *needed* to display the  
full object. HTML or text documents, embedded in an HTML document, do  
not have this characteristic. We might need to reword the sentence to  
make this more clear.

> 3) 3.2.1 Scalable Foreground Child Elements
> XHTML also has an IMG element. Is it expected that IMG elements  
> work the
> same as OBJECT elements (apart from parameter attributes, obviously)?
> Or is that undefined?

Yes, anything that can be done with the <img> element (in regard to  
scalable child elements), can be done as good or better using the  
<object> element. The idea is to make authors use the <object>  
element for this type of content. One advantage of <object> is, to  
allow alternative content to be provided (for non WICD agents).

> 4) Still-image Rendering
> What is the default value for the "render" parameter?

Yes, we need to say what is the default.

> 9) 7.2 Font Naming
> "There are typically less fonts available": less -> fewer

Will be fixed. Thanks.

Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2006 05:00:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:21 UTC