- From: Hausenblas, Michael <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 20:00:06 +0100
- To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Cc: <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Boris, I did the analysis, see [1], but I don't see fragments explicitly mentioned in the registration document, hence maybe the confusion. Cheers, Michael [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/MediaTypeReview Sent from my iPad On 6 May 2011, at 19:43, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote: > Section 2.2.1 of http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-media-frags-20110317/ says: > > An analysis of all media type registrations showed that there is > not a single media type registration in the audio/*, image/*, video/* > branches that is currently defining fragments or fragment semantics. > > I'm not sure how this analysis was conducted, but image/svg+xml is defined to be SVG and SVG does in fact define fragment semantics. > > This means that applying media fragments to SVG images, at the very least, would cause behavior changes in current UAs. > > For an example, see the simple SVG testcase in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011May/0114.html > > I'm not quite sure what to do about this problem, honestly. > > -Boris >
Received on Friday, 6 May 2011 18:59:03 UTC