- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 15:13:45 -0400
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Hi, Jonas- Jonas Sicking wrote (on 5/1/09 4:41 AM): > On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Doug Schepers<schepers@w3.org> wrote: >> Through an oversight, the only specified way to link to an external CSS >> stylesheet is through an XML PI. While this works okay, it's not the best >> way to do it, and is different than the way HTML does it. We're looking at >> a couple of options: >> >> 1) we add @xlink:href to<svg:style> > > Gecko supports the @null:src attribute on<html:style> elements. I > don't know if this is supported in any other browsers. Would be nice > to line it up with this, and would also make it more consistent with > things like script@src which I've understood the SVG WG to be > investigating? Correct, we haven't worked out the details, but we do plan to "decommission" @xlink:href, allowing @null:href and/or @null:src in its place. The only open questions, IIRC, are whether @null:href and @null:src can be used interchangeably, or if @null:href is for "outbound" links and @null:src for "inbound" ones; and when and where exactly to specify this... we're doing a set of modules (read: smaller specs) for SVG 2.0, so either it will go in related modules (say, where we talk about <use> or <image>), or in the "core" spec. Not an issue, just a logistical blip. I'd like to see this issue settled by the time inline-SVG (SVG-in-text/html) is. >> 2) we add a new element, like<link>, to SVG (I've already shown that this >> sometimes works when the<link> is in the XHTML NS [1], but that isn't >> specified anywhere, and isn't intuitive) > > If you do add this (which I think you should), it'd be nice if > <svg:link> and<html:link> was compatible in more areas other than > just linking to stylesheets. Yes, we intend for them to be more or less the same in terms of syntax and functionality. What specifically did you have in mind? >> Regarding passing parameters, SVG has never had a mechanism for this. We >> would like to add one. Again, we can either create a new element, or we >> could repurpose the<param> element from the HTML<object>, for use in SVG. > > Why do you want to pass parameters? > > The only "stylesheet" language which supports parameters that I know > of is XSLT, and XSLT is unlikely to ever work with any other linking > mechanism than<?xml-stylesheet?>. If you do want to add parameter > passing to<?xml-stylesheet?> we couldn't use a<param> element since > <?xml-stylesheet?> has no children. Gecko has support for parameter > passing using the<?xslt-param-namespace?> and<?xslt-param?> PIs, > which might be a good starting point for standardizing this. Sorry, I wasn't clear. The theme of my email was "adding elements with the same name as those in HTML", not "stuff about stylesheets". :) So, the <link> and <param> elements wouldn't necessarily interact. The <param> element would be used, for example, as a child of the <use> or <animation> elements, where it's referencing other SVG files which can take parameters. In other words, it would be used like it is in <object>: <use xlink:href="somefile.svg#someElement"> <param name="color" value="cornflowerblue"/> </use> Is there in insuperable problem with adding these elements to SVG, given matching syntax and behavior? (Note that <param> *could* concievably interact with CSS, using a combination of Glazou's CSS Variables proposal [1] and the SVG 'param()' spec [2]. That might be cool, but we're not going there just yet.) [1] http://disruptive-innovations.com/zoo/cssvariables/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-SVGParam-20090430/ Regards- -Doug Schepers W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Friday, 1 May 2009 19:13:58 UTC