- From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:29:29 -0000
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Hi, Section 15 Extended XLinks Why have these? Implementation cost seems excessive when RCC can provide it at zero cost to the user, are they really useful enough for situations where RCC/scripting will not be available? 16.2 Copyright info Recommending a UA have a full RDF parser purely to access copyright information seems excessive, whilst I like the idea, I do not feel any user agents will implement it, simply because RDF is too expensive to add in plug-in style environments. If they do, can we please have the RDF parser included elsewhere! I'd suggest a simpler copyright disclaimer methodology that the UA is encouraged to include, with a link to an RDF version. 17.2 SVGMedia interface // width and height in pixels (or natural width and height for vector fomats) readonly unsigned float width; readonly unsigned float height; Is the "natural width for vector formats" also described in pixels? Are the pixels pixels in the raster sense, or pixels in the CSS sense used elsewhere in SVG? getMetadata (str) - The cost of implementing this seems excessive, and I don't feel that UA's are likely to do it for more than a couple of metadata types. I would like a getAllMetadata() method which returns all metadata it has found as a DOMString (or bag of bytes whatever the format is for that), so it could be a chunk of RDF, or a chunk of EXIF data, and the script author can then provide the decoding of the metadata, I feel this is much easier on the UA developer - encouraging widespread interopable development - and will make more metadata types available to the author who can parse them herself. Why do we have xlink:href on the style element, is the PI method deprecated? I welcome this move away from the general XML methods, and like the precedent set - lets kill other parts too :-) Jim.
Received on Saturday, 15 November 2003 10:30:30 UTC