- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:47:53 -0700
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Takashi Sakamoto <tasak@google.com>
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote: > Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> Is there a way to just say that <svg:style> is identical to >> <html:style>, except for the namespace? That would let us drop most >> of the definition, and stay permanently up-to-date. > > That'd be nice, but is that feasible given that they have different DOM > interfaces? We could have HTML split out the meat of HTMLStyleElement into > a separate interface that can be mixed in to SVGStyleElement, I guess. Two additional possibilities: 1. Make SVGStyleElement just inherit from HTMLStyleElement. 2. Drop SVGStyleElement, make <svg:style> implement HTMLStyleElement instead. Both of these have the downside that "el instanceof SVGElement" no longer works for <svg:style>, but I doubt there's actually any compat risk. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2013 06:48:40 UTC