- From: Antoine Quint <ml@graougraou.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:58:06 +0100
- To: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
Hi Jim, > 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? I think you went a little quick in terms of implementation/user costs. I would not rank this feature in the "excessive" implementation cost, and someone would have to do it RCC. Anyway, that's not really the point, the main thing is that this was a clear request from various indutries to have it built-in. There was at some point suggestions to have extended links stylable and this was axed so that more complex extended links (in terms of appearance or content) will be implemented by RCC. Current extended links is basically simple instructions to have native UI pop-up with a bunch of associated links show up. > Why do we have xlink:href on the style element, is the PI method > deprecated? Yes! This was acutally most likely an oversight in SVG 1.0 and 1.1, and should have been there all along instead of the evil PI! The "why" part is for consistence and removing the need for the PI. Antoine -- Antoine Quint <aq@fuchsia-design.com> W3C SVG Working Group Invited Expert SVG Consulting, Teaching and Outsourcing Fuchsia Design <http://www.fuchsia-design.com/>
Received on Saturday, 15 November 2003 10:58:24 UTC