- From: Timur Mehrvarz <timur.mehrvarz@web.de>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:45:09 +0100
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- Cc: public-cdf@w3.org
Hello Bert. Thank you for your comments. My brief response to some of your points inline. > 2) 3 Scalable Child Elements > > I think the most common presentation of "scalable child elements" > is not > to fit the screen, but to be shown inline in an HTML (or in this case: > WICD) document. Even if they are shown on their own, a typical > computer > will show them in a window, not full-screen. What is meant here, is that, scalable child elements (such as SVG objects) can always be scaled down enough, to fit fully inside whatever destination box (be it a desktop window or the screen of a portable device). No scroll bars are ever *needed* to display the full object. HTML or text documents, embedded in an HTML document, do not have this characteristic. We might need to reword the sentence to make this more clear. > 3) 3.2.1 Scalable Foreground Child Elements > > XHTML also has an IMG element. Is it expected that IMG elements > work the > same as OBJECT elements (apart from parameter attributes, obviously)? > Or is that undefined? Yes, anything that can be done with the <img> element (in regard to scalable child elements), can be done as good or better using the <object> element. The idea is to make authors use the <object> element for this type of content. One advantage of <object> is, to allow alternative content to be provided (for non WICD agents). > 4) 3.2.1.1 Still-image Rendering > > What is the default value for the "render" parameter? Yes, we need to say what is the default. > 9) 7.2 Font Naming > > "There are typically less fonts available": less -> fewer Will be fixed. Thanks. Timur
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2006 05:00:55 UTC