- 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