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

Re: SVG 1.2 Comment: Detailed last call comments (all chapters)

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:45:14 +0000 (UTC)
To: Peter Sorotokin <psorotok@adobe.com>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0411101141170.8631@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Peter Sorotokin wrote:
> 
> I think that the correct way of doing this would be for CSS group to 
> develop a naming scheme for properties and get it reviewed by other 
> groups or somehow have namespaced properties to avoid conflicts. I agree 
> that current lack of naming conventions can cause potential problems, 
> but on the other hand I do not see any reason to rename this property. 

The HCG is supposed to be setting up a joint group to do this.


> We have fill, stroke, filter, etc., why suddenly we cannot have overlay?

'filter' in particular is a problem. It clashes with a property that was 
in an older draft of CSS2, and which was implemented by IE. It basically 
means that IE will never be able to implement SVG in HTML. (A lot of 
legacy content uses the 'filter' property.) It also means that user agents 
such as Mozilla and Opera have to make a decision when they implement SVG: 
Implement SVG filters, or implement IE filters? IE filters are more widely 
used, but SVG filters are a standard. It's not always a simple choice.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2004 11:45:17 UTC

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