W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > January 2006

Re: SVGT 1.2: SVG fragment identifiers

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 02:35:04 -0800
Message-Id: <CE43E107-438A-4714-82C7-337ED187341B@apple.com>
Cc: www-svg@w3c.org
To: Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc>


On Dec 30, 2005, at 4:28 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:

> | 3) It is inappropriate for the specification to talk about specific
> | mechanisms for accessling links in other languages.
>
> I don't think that anything in the passage quoted dictated terms  
> for any
> other languages. I think HTML was used as an example because HTML is
> overwhelmingly the language used for linking on the Web, and it  
> provides
> context for the inward linking mechanism about to be described.

Here's the direct, word-for-word quote:

"When a source document performs a link into an SVG document via an  
HTML [HTML4] anchor element (i.e., <a href=...> element in HTML) or  
an XLink specification [XLINK], then the SVG fragment identifier  
shall specify the initial view into the SVG document, as follows:"

As written it clearly seems to be specifying specifically the  
behavior of HTML4 anchor elements and XLinks.

> | Instead of talking about what mechanisms in other
> | languages should do, the spec should say what  the SVG
> | implementation must when presented with an absolute IRI reference
> | that includes a fragment identifier.
>
> I think that's exactly what it's doing. That's the way I read it,  
> at least.

That's not how it reads to me - I invite you to examine the direct  
quote above. Note that there's no nearby language calling these  
examples or saying this is what the SVG viewer should do no matter  
what mechanism leads it to be handed an absolute IRI reference to an  
SVG document.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Monday, 2 January 2006 10:35:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:33 GMT