- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 10:40:38 -0800
- To: "Ted Shanyfelt \(by way of Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>\)" <ted@ahi.uhh.hawaii.edu>, <www-style@w3.org>
Hi, Ted, I think that notation "foobar.svg?f=foo&b=bar" is not so good. For example I have svg generated on the server dynamicly by some CGI module which accepts parameters by its own: body { background: url(http://mysite/foobar.cgi?param1=foo¶m2=bar); } How to pass parameters to returned SVG then? Parameters should be given out of url string somehow. Let url be just url. Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ted Shanyfelt (by way of Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>)" <ted@ahi.uhh.hawaii.edu> To: <www-style@w3.org> Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 9:22 AM Subject: Re: Multiple Background Images | | | >>> body { background: url(foo) url(bar); } | | ..... | | >>> Should the syntax be like that, or would something else be better? | > | > Definitely something else. (But what?) | | body { background: url(foobar.svg?f=foo&b=bar); } | | Of course, we'd need to coordinate with SVG standard | to pass parameters to SVG or XML. | (Is coordination possible with one of these other standards?) | |
Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 18:40:56 UTC