- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:09:32 -0800
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
On Jan 14, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > Joe D Williams, Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:25:26 -0800: >>> Joe, you did not answer my question (or perhaps I was unclear): What >>> if the <iframe> element resides in a XHTML5 document? Does @doc then >>> still only permit text/html content? >> >> If what you are asking is can you use <iframe> to import text/html >> into a browser-hosted document defined as application/xhtml+xml, then >> the imported stuff must obey xml and be in the default document >> namespace or parent namespace of the iframe? > > May be Maciej should answer what he meant: > >>>>> Maciej Stachowiak, Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:52:20 -0800: >>> >>>>>>> The question still remains... would @doc allow SVG code, for >>>>>>> example? >>>>>> >>>>>> Using SVG-in-HTML, yes (since it assumes a text/html MIME type). >>>>>> Using the traditional XML serialization of SVG, no. > > In the thread it was said that it would have to be text/html code. But > I'll suppose that it was meant that content of @doc has to have the > the same MIME as the parent document. I was only answering the question when the containing document is text/ html. I did not check what the spec says if the containing document is XML. As for what the behavior *should* be, I could see an argument either way. Regards, Maciej
Received on Friday, 15 January 2010 01:10:06 UTC