- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:36:23 +0200
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Sunday, August 21, 2005, 7:12:13 PM, L. wrote: LDB> On Sunday 2005-08-21 18:43 +0200, Chris Lilley wrote: >> On Sunday, August 21, 2005, 6:28:24 PM, L. David Baron wrote: >> LDB> On Sunday 2005-08-21 18:20 +0200, Chris Lilley wrote: >> >> On Sunday, April 24, 2005, 7:27:38 PM, Bjoern wrote: >> >> BH> From http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-SVGMobile12-20050413/extend.html >> >> BH> section 19.2 >> >> >> >> BH> [...] >> >> BH> The contents of 'foreignObject' are assumed to be from a different >> >> BH> namespace. Any SVG elements within a 'foreignObject' will not be >> >> BH> drawn, except in the situation where a properly defined SVG >> >> BH> subdocument with a proper xmlns (see "Namespaces in XML 1.1" [XML-NS]) >> >> It is prohibited by the schema, you are correct that this is not >> >> desired. The spec has been altered by removing the text after 'drawn' so >> >> that the sentence ends there. Thus leading to the text, The contents of 'foreignObject' are assumed to be from a different namespace. Any SVG elements within a 'foreignObject' will not be drawn. >> LDB> Shouldn't it instead say that any SVG element *children* of a >> LDB> 'foreignObject' will not be drawn? Yes. >> But the original wording seemed to allow direct SVG children. Can you >> suggest better text to clarify this? LDB> Using what I said above: LDB> The contents of 'foreignObject' are assumed to be from a different LDB> namespace. Any SVG element children within a 'foreignObject' must not LDB> be drawn. That seem to be exactly what I said, except s/will/must/, a change i certainly agree with. >> The current wording makes it clear that the existing renderer is not to >> render any SVG content which occurs as either direct children or as >> nested children of foreignObject. Right. So can I take it that we now agree with this text? -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2005 13:36:33 UTC