- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:06:16 +1000
- To: Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>
- Cc: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Erik Dahlström: > > It seems for container elements, however, such as <g>, the <desc>, > > <title> and <metdata> elements can go anywhere. > > Yes, the spec explicitly says this for container > and text elements, see last paragraph of > http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/struct.html#DescriptionAndTitleElements. Ah OK. > > In SVG Tiny 1.2, the RNG doesn’t require <rect>’s descriptive element > > children to come first. Is this behaviour we want to backport to 1.1 > > when publishing the Second Edition (by virtue of starting from the 1.2T > > RNG and adding on to it)? I think it is reasonable. > > I think there's good reason for recommending <title>, <desc> and > <metadata> to be the first child elements. This is a content > conformance rule only. I'd like to encourage authors to put these > elements before other child elements. So if we decide to remove that > rule from the DTD we should put a strong recommendation for authors in > the spec instead. OK. Or we could go the other way, and modify the 1.2T RNG to require the descriptive elements to be the first children. I don’t mind either way. What do others think? > SVT12 states: > "It is strongly recommended that authors use at most one 'title' and > at most one 'desc' element as an immediate child of any particular > element, and that these elements appear before any other child > elements (except possibly 'metadata' elements) or character data > content." That same sentence is in that last paragraph of 5.4 in SVG 1.1 you mentioned, too. > ...and then goes on to explain what happens when there are multiple > <title> elements etc. I think it’s good to call out these restrictions due to the schema in the prose of the spec, since not everyone is going to delve into the schema. -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Saturday, 18 April 2009 01:06:58 UTC