- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:52:22 +0200
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- CC: public-svg-wg@w3.org
On Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 2:45:43 AM, Cameron wrote: CM> I have ACTION-2543 to fix up the content model of the <font-face> CM> element to permit exactly one <font-face-src> element. The relevant CM> minuted discussion is: CM> http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#item03 CM> Currently the spec says <font-face> allows at most one <font-face-src> CM> child. There is some prose that says: CM> When used to describe the characteristics of an SVG font contained CM> within the same document, it is recommended that the ‘font-face’ CM> element be a child of the ‘font’ element it is describing so that the CM> ‘font’ element can be self-contained and fully-described. In this CM> case, any ‘font-face-src’ elements within the ‘font-face’ element are CM> ignored as it is assumed that the ‘font-face’ element is describing CM> the characteristics of its parent ‘font’ element. CM> So changing <font-face> to require a <font-face-src> child seems to CM> conflict with the above text. Could someone (Chris?) confirm whether we CM> really should be changing the <font-face> content model like this? Re-reading the minutes, I was clearly not thinking of the text cited above when I was speaking. It should be zero or one. Effectively, font-face and font-face-src are alternates. I think the original discussion was about having multiple <font-face-src> element children, which was originally to support multiple formats or multiple download sources, but we had decided not to support I think? -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Technical Director, Interaction Domain W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Wednesday, 5 August 2009 07:53:04 UTC