- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:07:43 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Scott Hayman <shayman@rim.com>
- Cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, www-svg@w3.org
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Scott Hayman wrote: > > What you seem to be saying is that the table [1] isn't complete, but > from what I can tell, every row has an entry for every column. Can you > please give a specific example of where there is an issue? As far as I can tell, there is a column missing (the one corresponding to "Reference a fragment within the current document but outside the current SVG document fragment". An example would be, should the following consist an invalid IRI reference or not: <test> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"> <g focusable="true" nav-next="url(#test)"/> <!-- Here --> </svg> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"> <g focusable="true" xml:id="test"/> </svg> </test> The current text doesn't say if that is invalid or not -- it says that it covers all the possibilities, but doesn't cover this one. Another example would be: <test> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:x="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <discard x:href="test"/> </svg> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"> <g xml:id="test"/> </svg> </test> (This example is especially ambiguous since the xlink:href="" attribute on the <discard> element is defined as taking an IRI reference, but the "target element" of the <discard> element is defined relative to an xlink:href="" attribute that has a different definition, and which says that the reference must be to the current SVG fragment.) -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 16 December 2005 19:08:01 UTC