W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2003

RE: RCC Extension

From: Alexander Adam <alex.adam@evolgrafix.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:27:18 +0100
To: "'Antoine Quint'" <ml@graougraou.com>
Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000101c3a879$0f400970$7302a8c0@AAdamStation>

Hi Antoine,

> This type of issue has already been raised within the working group.

Sorry, I wasn't aware of. Its hard to implement this new technology and
really use it and at the same time follow the progress of the SVG Group.

> One possibility is to require in your authoring tool that each
> extension is documented with an accompanying schema (XSD, RNG, you
name
> it) which would handle not only definition and typing of attributes on
> an element, but also allow for defining more complex structures where
> attributes can be defined once and re-used, etc. I'll save you all the
> benefits from using a schema language. I believe that right now, the
> RCC syntax is not meant to serve as a schema and leveraging other
> existing technologies could complement the necessary framework you
need
> on an authoring perspective.

Well, I think a big plus of SVG until now was that is powerful yet easy
to use/develop. But using a special schema only for properties is, I
think, too complex for most users. I think it should stay simple. An
Extension of the <elementDef> Element with a new child e.g. <model> like
in my sample that includes all properties would be the most logic and
easiest way, speaking from a component developer side (Delphi). Surely
there could be two possibilities with either this simple mode and the
more complex one with a schema.

> However, there would be possibly very interesting new possibilities if
> there were an RCC mechanism to specify what certain attributes have as
> a datatype. One issue that has been raised is the poor RCC integration
> with animation as you would have to know the nature of the custom
> attribute's value to animate it. 

That's absolutely true. The same for authoring tools.
But shouldn't it be enough to provide all the SVG Basic Types such as
SVGLEngth, SVGColor etc. as possible property types? Then viewers would
have it easy to animate as they can use already known formats.

> The working group is currently looking
> at how we can add a notion of attributes specification to custom
> elements so that this would be possible.
> 
> Stay tuned.

When will you expect results? Could you keep me posted?
What'd you advise now to use for a proof-of-concept implementation of
RCC into an authoring solution? What method to use or how to generally
do it for now?

mfG / Sincerely
Alexander Adam
EvolGrafiX - http://www.evolgrafix.com
SVGCaf - http://www.svg-cafe.com
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 12:27:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 5 November 2012 23:52:55 GMT