W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > February 1999

Re: <althtml> questions

From: Jon Ferraiolo <jferraio@Adobe.COM>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 11:07:20 -0800
Message-Id: <199902161904.LAA16339@mail-345.corp.Adobe.COM>
To: andreww@netscape.com (Andrew Wooldridge)
Cc: svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Andrew,
Sounds like a reasonable suggestion to me. I agree that <althtml> is a bad
name and that <nosvg> is consistent with the approaches in other languages.
I'll make sure that we address this issue in the WG before the next public
draft.

Jon Ferraiolo
Adobe Systems Incorporated
Member of the SVG Working Group (& editor of the latest spec)


At 10:52 AM 2/16/99 -0800, Andrew Wooldridge wrote:
>It seems to me that the ALTHTML tag is too specific.  What if HTML is
>not used at all here?
>Shouldn't it be something more generic like <ALT>
>Or perhaps follow the precedent set by frames, embedding,layers, script
>which all use:
><noembed>
><noframes>
><nolayer>
><noscript>
>
>So why not use
>
><nosvg> instead?
>
>
>--
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>- Andrew Wooldridge    -     Opinions expressed are my own -
>- andreww@netscape.com -     http://people.netscape.com/andreww/
>- my Q: 11111          -     my ICQ: 6345881
> 
Received on Tuesday, 16 February 1999 14:05:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:16 GMT