W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > December 2004

RE: 1.2 uDOM

From: James Bentley <James.Bentley@guideworkstv.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:59:10 -0700
Message-ID: <687B7858C99ED711B87B00B0D0D1C922C0FE76@LAMBIC>
To: 'Robin Berjon' <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Cc: "'www-svg@w3.org'" <www-svg@w3.org>

OK, thanks.

-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin.berjon@expway.fr]
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 11:01 AM
To: James Bentley
Cc: 'www-svg@w3.org'
Subject: Re: 1.2 uDOM


James Bentley wrote:
> Would it make sense to move getElementById to
> SVGDocument then?

No, because there *can* be some knowledge of IDness in other namespaces, 
it's just not guaranteed enough that back in the day it was justified to 
have .id on Element. The only ID that SVG implementations are required 
to know about is the 'id' attribute on SVG elements.

-- 
Robin Berjon
Received on Wednesday, 8 December 2004 18:06:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:29 GMT