- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 14:21:17 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
Le 09/10/2013 11:25, Dirk Schulze a écrit : > I agree that it is better to come up with a general proposal that we > accept for all specifications. For this reason I removed select() and > child from the first level of CSS Masking. This gives us enough time > to discuss element selecting and we don't need to rush it. > url(#fragment) for element referencing still needs to be supported > for legacy reasons anyway. Although this is another case of "everyone at this table knows what this means", for the spec to be well-defined CSS Masking will, like GCPM, need to define (or refer to something that defines) exactly how url(foo.svg#bar) is mapped to a single element. * What is the base for relative URLs? (V&U probably already covers this) * If the URL (fragment aside) is for another document, is an external resource fetched? (The answer here might differ for Masking and GCPM) * What happens if the URL has no fragment? * How is a fragment mapped to an element? (Not just IDs, but <a name> etc.) * What happens if more that one element have that ID/name? These issues are not especially hard, but they need normative statements. -- Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 13:21:42 UTC