W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2002

Re: [SVG1.0] no tspan allowed inside an anchor?

From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 17:07:11 +0200
Message-ID: <3D61099F.6030403@pinkjuice.com>
To: www-svg@w3.org

Jon Ferraiolo wrote:

> [...] I disagree with removing <tspan>.

I also see no reason for that.

Only in future versions, when all text structure might be modeled anew, 
as part of an overhaul (which might make sense after text-wrapping etc. 
has been introduced), it might make sense to replace/rename/, (or also 
leave it as is).

> There is a clear difference
> between something which identifies the start/end of a text block and
> something which alters the attributes of a portion of a text block.

I agree.

> But most importantly, the cat is out of the bag. People have been
> developing content using <tspan> for years now, and it is now almost a
> year since SVG 1.0 became a Recommendation, so lots of content has been
> developed since we officially said "go use <tspan>".

Yes; last call for 1.0 is long gone.

> Overall, I don't believe that it is worth disrupting the SVG community
> by deprecating <tspan>.

I agree.

> However, I think the working group should reevaluate the restriction on
> <a> and <tspan>.

That would be great!

> Tobi (I think) pointed out that we might be able to do
> something the XML Schema or at least via supplemental notes in the spec
> to prevent this from being legal:
> <svg>
>   <a>
>     <tspan>

"an a can have tspan children, but only if it has a text ancestor"

stuff like this would be useful



Received on Monday, 19 August 2002 11:06:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:53:55 UTC