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

RE: SVG12: SVGGlobal::document vs AbstractView

From: Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:56:17 -0400
To: "'Bjoern Hoehrmann'" <derhoermi@gmx.net>, <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20060608195656.6DA749584@postalmail-a1.dreamhost.com>

Hi, Bjoern-

Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
| 
| * Jon Ferraiolo wrote:
| >We don't need AbstractView or DocumentView. The only time one needs
| >those two interfaces is when the format supports DOM2 Views, but SVG
| >Tiny 1.2 (or any version of SVG) does not support DOM2 Views.
| 
| SVG 1.1 required complete support for DOM Level 2 Views; this includes
| DocumentView which provides a single member to obtain the 
| default view.
| This happens to be the global object. Instead of building upon this
| feature, or other already existing proprietary solutions to obtain the
| default view like .parentWindow, SVG Tiny 1.2 introduces a 'global'
| member on the SVGDocument interface. So when you say you 
| don't need it,
| you really mean you need the functionality, but provide it in a way
| that is not compatible with SVG 1.1 or other W3C Recommendations.

SVG Full 1.1 did indeed require complete support for DOM Level 2 Views, but
SVG Tiny 1.1 did not have scripting, and so did not have a DOM. SVG Tiny 1.2
does allow scripting, so it supports a proper subset of DOM2 that does not
require AbstractView.

If this does not satisfy your concern, please respond within 2 weeks with
further clarification.

Thanks-
Doug, on behalf of the SVG WG 
Received on Thursday, 8 June 2006 19:57:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:34 GMT