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

Re: SVG 1.2: Something Missing?

From: Alexander Adam <alex.adam@evolgrafix.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 18:16:00 +0100
To: <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000401c405fa$31d9b290$6402a8c0@AAdamStation>

Hi Peter,

>First off, I'd suggest that for any custom grammar that someone wants
to 
>develop there should
>be a schema. You need to know not only attribute list, but nesting
rules as 
>well.

>In terms of RCC, there will be an element that defines a "trait" -
which is 
>basically an animatable attribute.
>Right now we think we need only namespace, name and data type. Maybe
also 
>of it is a regular or
>presentation attribute (and can be styled with CSS).

So is there any place on the current SVG 1.2 Draft where something like
this is mentioned or handled? I imagined something like this (just as a
theoretical sample):

<elementDef ...>
  <prototype>
    { Visual Stuff }
  </prototype>
  <script ..>{Script Stuff}</script>
  <properties>
    <property name="max" type="SVGLength" default="100"/>
  </properties>
</elementDef>

that's something I'd imagine as the easiest way to specify the available
properties of a custom element. If you have to add your own schema its
getting more and more complex for authors to develop custom rcc
components.. Is this something you've been speaking about or am I
totally wrong? If yes, please enlighten me by showing a practical sample
if possible.

Thanks,

mfG / Sincerely
Alexander Adam
EvolGrafiX - http://www.evolgrafix.com
SVGCaf - http://www.svg-cafe.com
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2004 12:16:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:26 GMT