W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: [css3-images] Defining SVG paint servers as a CSS <image>

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 21:32:09 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=P2R+mUzKMkFf_+8FH952pJxhKhw@mail.gmail.com>
To: robert@ocallahan.org
Cc: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, public-fx@w3.org
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Is there any particular reason you're using element() instead of url()
>>> for this?
>>
>> Yes. No spec defines background:url(file.svg#pattern) to fill with the
>> pattern. An SVG 1.2 draft suggested that we should treat the entire file.svg
>> as an SVG image and align the viewport to the referenced element (much like
>> <a> does, I guess). In the absence of a spec, the default behavior for all
>> UAs is to simply load file.svg as an image and ignore the fragment. We
>> didn't want to just change that arbitrarily.
>
> (especially when it was clear that some people wanted it to behave in a
> different way)

In that case, do you allow a url in element(), or can it only refer to
inline SVG?

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2011 04:33:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 30 June 2011 04:33:09 GMT