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

Re: Towards resolution of SVG 1.2 Flowing text

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 21:07:48 +0100
Message-ID: <16380888.20041102210748@w3.org>
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: Dean Jackson <dean@w3.org>, www-svg@w3.org

On Tuesday, November 2, 2004, 8:27:02 PM, Robert wrote:


ROC> Chris Lilley wrote:

>>Or alternatively, that the definition of a para is presentational. Which
>>it is, as in languages like HTML which sit somewhere in the middle of the
>>continuum from abstraction to concreteness.
>>
ROC> Then what exactly is the defined presentational behaviour of a 
ROC> paragraph, and how does it differ from a DIV?

paragraphs, like divs, are a block of text that starts on a new line and
whose following block of text also starts on a new line. This is why I
said they are mid way along the continuum.

If one imagines a syntax which is more abstract, such as for example a
pharmaceutical markup with dose, contra-indication, side-effect
and suchlike elements, then some of those might be mapped to paragraps
in one presentation and to inline elements in others.

ROC> Anyway, even if we agree that SVG text is purely presentational, CSS is
ROC> clearly presentational too so in general there's still overlap with CSS
ROC> to deal with.

And XSL-FO is clearly presentational too.



-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Tuesday, 2 November 2004 20:07:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:52 UTC