W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2005

Re: Resolving URIs in shadow trees

From: Jon Ferraiolo <jonf@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 02:54:16 -0700
To: Cameron McCormack <cam-www-svg@aka.mcc.id.au>, www-svg@w3.org
Message-id: <>

At 02:13 AM 8/2/2005, Cameron McCormack wrote:

>Hi Jon.
>Jon Ferraiolo:
> > but I think everyone would agree that ID referencing within
> > fragment identifiers are processed by
> > currentElement.ownerDocument.getElementById(), except for sXBL shadow
> > trees, where you call getElementById() on the relevant <shadowTree> 
> element
> > that is the root of the shadow tree.
>I don't know if I would agree with that.  I'm sure there'd be situations
>where you want a binding document to have some gradients defined (for
>example) that are used by all the shadow trees for a particular binding,
>and you want to use a URI reference that contains only a fragment
>identifier.  It would be a bit messy to have to include the gradient
>element in each generated shadow tree.

Yes, you are correct. The search for matching IDs should always include 
currentElement.ownerDocument.getElementById(), even in shadow trees.

Maybe the rules is that first you call getElementById() on the <shadowTree> 
and then if no match is found then call it on ownerDocument. What do you think?


>   e-mail : cam (at) mcc.id.au           icq : 26955922
>      web : http://mcc.id.au/            msn : cam-msn (at) aka.mcc.id.au
>   office : +61399055779              jabber : heycam (at) jabber.org
Received on Tuesday, 2 August 2005 09:55:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:04 UTC