W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > July to September 2008

Test attributes on non-rendering elements; styling changes

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:20:31 +1000
To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080811062030.GG18982@arc.mcc.id.au>

Hello WG.

I am looking at tweaking the wording of the “Conditional processing”
section of the Document Structure chapter to eliminate some repetition
and make sure the required processing is clear.  I just want to check
that for this fragment:

  <switch>
    <g requiredFeatures="bogus"/>
    <script/>
    <text>hello</text>
  </switch>

that the <text> element should not render.  The description in 5.8.1
says:

  The 'switch' renders the first of its direct children for which all of
  these [test] attributes test true.

and <script> doesn’t render.  There are specific mentions in this
section about element to which the test attributes don’t apply, and
5.8.2 says:

  The conditional processing of the 'switch' element applies only to the
  rendering tree; non-rendering child elements, such as the 'script'
  element, are not affected by 'switch'.


I think 5.8.1 could do with an explanation of how the test attributes
can be used in two situations (on an element whose parent is <switch>,
and on any other element).  Also, 5.8.2 doesn’t mention how the
animation and <discard> elements will be affected by the test
attributes, like 5.8.1, so it would be good to get that consistent.


And, while I have your eyes, I’d like to suggest a couple of styling
changes in the spec.  (Now, I know that styling is relatively
unimportant, but I’ve found that in collaborative situations (like
programming) without strict rules, that issues of style can fall by the
wayside, since nobody wants to bother others about trivial issues.)  My
suggestions are:

  * Increase the line-height of the text.

    Lines of text are set quite close together at the moment, which IMO
    makes long paragraphs less readable.  For example take a look at:

      http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.2T/publish/intro.html#SVGTiny12

    I think a ‘line-height: 1.25’ rule to the stylesheet makes it more
    readable:

      http://mcc.id.au/temp/2008/intro.html#SVGTiny12

    It’s a small change, but I think it’s worth it.

  * Use something other than bold red for SVG term references.

    I think using bold red text for the links to term definitions is
    quite distracting, especially if you have many of them in a
    paragraph.  For example:

      http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.2T/publish/struct.html#DescriptionAndTitleElements

    After trying a few styles, I think normal black text underlined is
    effective, while still being differentiated from regular links:

      http://mcc.id.au/temp/2008/struct.html#DescriptionAndTitleElements

  * Use paragraphs inside attribute definition lists rather than <br>s.

    For readability, I think paragraphs should be used in attribute
    definition lists instead of <br>s.  Compare:

      http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.2T/publish/struct.html#SVGElementPlaybackOrder

    with:

      http://mcc.id.au/temp/2008/struct.html#SVGElementPlaybackOrder

That’s all for now. :)

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Monday, 11 August 2008 06:21:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:20:09 UTC