- From: Antoine Quint <ml@graougraou.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 17:23:46 +0100
- To: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On 15 nov. 03, at 17:14, Jim Ley wrote: >> As far I understand, <video> is a "subclass" of <image>, and it should >> just not render. > > I will certainly raise an issue against this, video, like images have > a size > and they should be consistent with the behaviour of including an SVG > image > defined the same. It should render. Huh? <image> does not render for 0 value width and/or height. Or did you mean something else? And please, don't raise your guns with issues right away, constructuve feedback like you send is sufficient for us to take notice and make for a more gentle exchange. It's just a draft. 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 11:28:40 UTC