- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:22:10 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Tony Schreiner <tonyschr@microsoft.com>
- cc: Kevin Ar18 <kevinar18@hotmail.com>, "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Tony Schreiner wrote: > > I strongly disagree with Jeff's interpretation of the spec. I have yet > to find the behavior clearly spelled out in any combination of specs but > the HTML5 spec says the following: > > "The svg element from the SVG namespace falls into the embedded content, > phrasing content, and flow content categories for the purposes of the > content models in this specification." > > Between this, working with our own CSS experts, and working from first > principles with the long-term future of SVG in mind, I've understood > this to mean that when an <svg> element is embedded in HTML5 or XHTML, > that outermost element does participate in the box model, and as such > CSS formatting such as backgrounds, borders, margin, and padding should > apply to that outermost SVG element, just like it would to a <div>, > <img>, <iframe> or any similar element. The line you cite does not mean that. All it means is that for the purposes of document conformance -- something that only affects authors, validators, and editors (including contenteditable implementations), but does not affect in any way CSS rendering rules or parsing or anything like that -- the <svg> element falls into certain content model categories. You should never need to read between the lines in the HTML spec; I've tried to make everything very explicit. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 21 August 2010 18:22:39 UTC