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

Re: Does SVG 1.0 define this? (non-<svg> root element)

From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 18:40:01 +0200
Message-ID: <40F561E1.2060102@expway.fr>
To: Dean Jackson <dean@w3.org>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org


Dean Jackson wrote:
> You're right. The interface should never change, so 
> in this case the HTML DOM must be used for HTML elements
> (if the UA groks HTML DOM).

Does this not create a use case for the xmlns() switch test?

-- 
Robin Berjon

Received on Wednesday, 14 July 2004 12:40:13 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: James Bentley: "consideration for SVG 1.2"
Previous message: Ian Hickson: "Re: Does SVG 1.0 define this?"
In reply to: Dean Jackson: "Re: Does SVG 1.0 define this? (non-<svg> root element)"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 September 2006 18:11:27 GMT