- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 21:32:09 -0700
- To: robert@ocallahan.org
- Cc: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, public-fx@w3.org
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> > wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Is there any particular reason you're using element() instead of url() >>> for this? >> >> Yes. No spec defines background:url(file.svg#pattern) to fill with the >> pattern. An SVG 1.2 draft suggested that we should treat the entire file.svg >> as an SVG image and align the viewport to the referenced element (much like >> <a> does, I guess). In the absence of a spec, the default behavior for all >> UAs is to simply load file.svg as an image and ignore the fragment. We >> didn't want to just change that arbitrarily. > > (especially when it was clear that some people wanted it to behave in a > different way) In that case, do you allow a url in element(), or can it only refer to inline SVG? ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2011 04:33:06 UTC