- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:25:27 +1300
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "ext Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@Xerox.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Arthur Barstow:
> * Should the WG pursue Dimitri Glazkov's Component Model proposal
> [Component]? If yes, who is willing to commit to work on that spec?
I promised Dmitri some use cases from the SVG WG’s perspective, but
haven’t managed to get to working on these yet. Whatever solution we
have in the end – and I personally am not really fussed about whether it
is XBL2 as it was, or is now, or something new based on Dmitri’s
requirements document – I would like it to be able to work without an
HTML document present. I want to be able to write a document like
<svg …>
<star cx="100" cy="100" points="5"/>
</svg>
or
<svg …>
<my:star xmlns:star="…" cx="100" cy="100" points="5"/>
</svg>
or
<svg …>
<g class="star" cx="100" cy="100" points="5"/>
</svg>
or
<svg …>
<g binding="star" cx="100" cy="100" points="5"/>
</svg>
(choosing <g> here because it’s kind of similar to a <div>), one of
those. Sorry for not having more concrete comments yet.
--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 21:26:09 UTC