- From: Divyansh Mangal via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 13:58:45 +0000
- To: public-svg-issues@w3.org
Chromium has not implemented the media fragments (temporal or spatial) currently https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40362942. so `&xywh` dropping is simply cause it doesnt work currently. But luckily, I am working on launching this feature in Chromium so I can give my inputs on this. (Thanks @karlcow for raising this i was planning to raise this issue myself) To simplify we have 4 types of fragments `BareName`, `SvgViewSpec`, `spacesegment`, `timesegment`. `spacesegment` is essentially `svgView(viewbox(x,y,w,h))` per the definition in https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/linking.html#SVGFragmentIdentifiersDefinitions > If the SVG fragment identifier addresses a [space segment](https://www.w3.org/TR/media-frags/#spacesegment) (e.g., MyDrawing.svg#xywh=0,0,100,100),then the initial view into the SVG document is established using the view specification attributes on the [outermost svg element](https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/struct.html#TermOutermostSVGElement) where the 'viewBox' is overriden by the x, y, width and height values provided by the fragment identifier. so combining them or applying them together (or using them together) does not achieve much. The user can simply use one of them to achieve the desired affect. Similarly combining any other non-temporal fragments like `BareName&SVGViewSpec` or `Barename&spacesegement` does not seem to add more value. The only exception to this is combining with `timesegment`. For which the [spec ](https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/linking.html#SVGFragmentIdentifiersDefinitions) says: >If the SVG fragment identifier addresses a combination of the above non-time related identifiers with a time-related identifier (i.e. a timesegment), the behavior of each identifier is applied. which works because unlike the other fragments, `timesegment` controls the timeline of the external svg so it doesn't clash with other fragments. Back to the question of this issue, for the resolution: I personally am not in favour of option 2, mainly cause from a user point of view the result can be achieved with a single use of any one of the different fragments. (it will also force us to think about other combinations too) For option 3, firefox variant don't support combination of a non-time segment with a time segment, example `image.svg#svgView(0,0,100,100)&t=5` so I believe they will reject such valid combinations too (per the current spec) (please correct me if I am wrong @longsonr @emilio). Won't talk about Chrome variant as its not implemented I would lean toward Option 1 to be honest (note that Option 3 firefox variant is the closest to this, it's just that the temporal combination does not work there) -- GitHub Notification of comment by goldenboy777 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/1112#issuecomment-4508991598 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 21 May 2026 13:58:46 UTC