W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2007

Re: Definition of a replaced element

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 09:23:23 -0500
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <20070103142323.GA8298@ridley.dbaron.org>
On Wednesday 2007-01-03 13:57 +0000, Mike Bremford wrote:
> the SVG tag is not going to inherit the fill from the body tag. Yes,  
> SVG uses CSS internally, but it's still considered a separate  
> document. Try this in Amaya, which supports foreign namespaces like  
> this, and you'll see what I mean.

That sounds like a bug in Amaya.

Interpreting the tiny bits of specs that imply something about how
SVG within HTML should work, but weren't intended to do that, might
lead to some conclusions.  But these aren't necessarily the right
ones.  (I'd hoped one of the things the CDF working group would be
doing is clarifying that, but that hasn't been the case so far, and
I've left the group.)

That said, the CSS WG has made a number of additions to CSS2.1
defining behavior for replaced elements that have an intrinsic ratio
but not an intrinsic width/height.  These are intended for such
cases [1], although the definitions of the default values of the
height and width attributes on the svg:svg element make them pretty
much useless for SVG as specified.

-David

[1] I'm not sure whether there was explicit discussion about whether
they were for external SVG or internal SVG, but I think they ought
to apply to both.

-- 
L. David Baron                                <URL: http://dbaron.org/ >
           Technical Lead, Layout & CSS, Mozilla Corporation

Received on Wednesday, 3 January 2007 14:23:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:49 GMT