W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > October 2009

Re: Renaming 'filter' member of CSSStyleDeclaration

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:57:41 +1300
Message-ID: <11e306600910181457r58f2ab4dyac1e5c137b4d5378@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:17:44 +0200, Robert O'Callahan <
> robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
>
>> They've worked around it by making 'filter' undetectable with magic JS
>> hacks similar to what multiple browsers do with "document.all". But a much
>> simpler solution is to name the CSSStyleDeclaration member instead, say
>> 'svgFilter'.
>> How do people feel about that? I'm not sure if any spec needs to be
>> changed since apparently the names of the CSSStyleDeclaration SVG members
>> aren't
>> actually in any spec...
>>
>
> cssFilter would be better for consistency with cssFloat, I think;


I guess, although the reasons are different...


> also since properties are not restricted to particular languages.
>

'filter' has to refer to an SVG filter element, though.

Personally I'm wavering ... I think perhaps given that we already have to
have black magic in JS engines to support undetectability for document.all,
maybe we should just reuse it here for the sake of consistency of the
property name.

Rob
-- 
"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
53:5-6]
Received on Sunday, 18 October 2009 21:58:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:43 GMT