- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:05:57 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 02/29/2012 12:26 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:43 AM, fantasai wrote: > > >> In that case it can be removed without changing the meaning of the spec, >> so let's do that and avoid the concerns about it. > > Uh, no. It's a useful example of how host languages can extend the > set of matchable elements. Sure, it's a nice example. But it doesn't change anything meaningful, and is therefore not critical. I'd rather add a nice example when there's a spec we're all happy to reference than put in an example that may become invalid within the next month. > >>>> - and the fact that the currently-proposed solution requires either scripting >>>> or presentation-only elements in the document even for simple cases like >>>> "I want to use a bunch of statically-defined paint servers written in >>>> SVG" >>> >>> Don't mix together the notions of "presentation-only HTML" and >>> "presentation-only SVG". *Most* of SVG is presentation-only. That's >>> the point. >> >> If I want to use an SVG paint server as a background, and in order to do >> that I have to insert the<pattern> element into every HTML file I apply >> my stylesheet to, that's pretty broken feature design whatever you want >> to call it. > > Or you can use scripting to generate it and insert it into the > document. This is identical to the case where you want to use a > <canvas> as the background. And this is better how? ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 21:06:34 UTC