- From: Arnold, Curt <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 16:59:38 -0600
- To: "'www-svg@w3.org'" <www-svg@w3.org>
- Cc: "'simonstl@simonstl.com'" <simonstl@simonstl.com>
In regards to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2001Oct/0045.html and following: Given that most generic DOM implementations would exhaust all system memory if path data were expressed as distinct elements, I think that the SVG designers made just about the right choice when to switch to a non-XML representation. However, that said, maybe the following links that discussed an alternative XML-based syntax for Xpath would be informative: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200012/msg00513.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xpath-comments/1999OctDec/0014.html If the primary motivation of XML-izing the svg path syntax is to be able to use XSLT more effectively, then maybe the appropriate approach is to implement filter to expand an SVG document read by an XSLT processor into "SVG using XML paths" tree and a serializer that writes true SVG though your transform is generating "SVG with XML paths". This alternative syntax would only exist for the duration of the transform and cause no implementation burden for SVG Viewers. P.s. Simon, were there any later developments in the Xpath in XML thread?
Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2001 19:01:23 UTC