- From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 14:36:11 +0200
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Jim Ley wrote: > What I've never fully understood is the motivation for tspan anyway, this > wouldn't be an issue if tspan didn't exist (and instead text could be a > child of text.) The difference in allowed attributes is minimal, and I > can't see anything obvious which would prevent this. > > So what is the motivation for the existence of tspan? I can't answer this, since I didn't design the DTD, but from my usage POV: In 1.0, one block of text gets represented as text, and lines as tspans. In ASV, you can select one block of text; if you don't use tspans, you can only select one line. BTW, about the subject and it's implications: In http://www.rubynewbies.com/~tobi/h_monster_chart.rb?IEHack=.svg , I rather would have one text plus tspans for the labels (so all text can be selected at once in ASV (the labels are all one block)), but the links must contain a rect and a tspan (now text), which would be invalid 1.0. Tobi -- http://www.pinkjuice.com/
Received on Monday, 19 August 2002 08:35:34 UTC