Re: CSS SVG Discussion on Thursday

On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:

> Some of the complaints against SMIL/SVG animation is that it mixes the
> animation with the content, but that doesn't need to be so. It would be
> fairly simply to define behaviour of an "animation sheet", referenced by a
> <link> element, that is an external file containing the animations. I'd
> suggest adding a selector attribute to the animation elements to replace
> xlink:href.
>

Maybe CSS animation is more appropriate for those use-cases?

- add a selector attribute to SMIL (possibly deprecating xlink:href) that
> would allow SMIL animations to apply to a collection of elements
>

I instinctively dislike the idea of selectors in content :-). If the author
really wants selectors, isn't that likely to be a use-case favouring CSS
animations?

If we need to support a single content animation applying to multiple
elements, we could add an SVG Animation (hereafter SVGA) feature to let
elements link to their animations as well as the current situation where
animations link to their elements. How does that sound?

BTW Patrick raised the question of whether SVGA should apply to HTML, which
I think means whether SVGA should be able to animate HTML attributes. I
believe it should not, mainly because HTML's presentational attributes are
deprecated. SVGA should certainly be able to animate CSS on HTML elements
though.

BTW^2 it's probably better to start using the term "SVG Animation" instead
of SMIL if we're going to diverge from the SMIL framework :-).

Rob
-- 
"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]