Re: Script in SVG vs. HTML (was: Input on the agenda)

On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 03:31:29 +0100, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:26 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com> wrote:
>>> 1.
>>> xlink:href vs. src. SVG-script uses xlink:href to link to an external
>>> stylesheet, vs HTML-script uses null:src. I think the best solution
>>> here would be to allow SVG-script to allow either xlink:href *or* src.
>>> We'd have to specify what to do if both are defined, I suggest we
>>> choose one to take priority, probably xlink:href.
>>
>> No, priority should go to the newer feature as it's what is supposed to
>> matter going forward, in this case src. If a user has added an src
>> attribute, presumably she knows what she's doing.
>>
>> I agree with Cameron that we want to drop this as an animated value, there
>> really isn't a valid use case for it (besides, the very idea of a processing
>> model for modifying script through SMIL is insane).
>
> Sounds even better.

We've already resolved that xlink:href on <script> isn't animatable, both for 1.1 [1] and 1.2T [2]. It's true that SVGScriptElement still has the SVGURIReference interface though. I think instead of removing that, it would be better to add a 'src' attribute on the SVGScriptElement interface that corresponds to @src (possibly with the option of getting the value from xlink:href if @src was missing).

And yes, I would also assume that @src takes precedence if there were both @xlink:href and @src on the element.

Cheers
/Erik

[1] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/errata.xml#script_animatable_xlink_href
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/script.html#ScriptElementHrefAttribute

-- 
Erik Dahlstrom, Core Technology Developer, Opera Software
Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
Personal blog: http://my.opera.com/macdev_ed

Received on Thursday, 12 March 2009 08:27:12 UTC