- From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
- Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 10:48:02 +0100
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Sigurd Lerstad wrote: > Okay.. I should say my opinions for SVG 1.2 before it's too late.. I'm > going to be quick. > > 1. > > remove <image> I'm not sure if there are (m)any reasons to make SVG 1.0 forwards-incompatible. > and have a xlink:href on <foreignObject> that links to > an external resource, or > > have <externalObject> in place of <image> and have <inlineObject> > instead of <foreignObject> > > This way, you first of all get closer to XHTML *Why* would this be a good thing in this case? > with the removal of > <img> and that <object> is always used instead, and you get a much > clearer link between embedded/non-embedded objects, which should > render the same way. I don't understand this. [I commenting only on this one suggestion, which doesn't mean I agree with all the others.] Tobi -- http://www.pinkjuice.com/
Received on Saturday, 25 January 2003 04:48:39 UTC