- From: Dean Jackson <dean@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:53:39 +1100
- To: Thomas DeWeese <Thomas.DeWeese@Kodak.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org, Cameron McCormack <cam-www-svg@aka.mcc.id.au>
On 26 Jan 2005, at 08:35, Thomas DeWeese wrote: > Hi All, > > Cameron just raised this to my attention again. I don't > think I actually followed what Dean had suggested the first time > I read this. > > I might agree that the document is in error, I would disagree > on the reason. Having read your response, I don't think we disagree at all :) I think it was my wording that confused you. The reasons you list are the same as I should have given, but I summarised it as "blah blah blah *BAD*". My mistake :) Dean > I think it is a really bad idea to allow users to > change the version attribute after the document has been loaded (or it > should have no effect). If you want to enable this you would have to > specify what implementations are expected to do with existing > references to DOM objects (do they lose the SVG 1.2 methods? Try that > with a strongly typed language ;). At the very least it would imply > that the implementation would have to walk the DOM checking for > elements or references that are now invalid (re-evaluate switches). > > This just strikes me as an almost impossible to implement > feature with almost no reason for existing. Also given the > issues with the Object model I have a hard time imagining any kind of > consistent behavior across browsers/binding languages. > > Dean Jackson wrote: > >> No such thing as a stupid question. Only stupid people. >> (I'm in that group) >> On 14 Jan 2005, at 15:13, Cameron McCormack wrote: >>> ...but what happens if you change the value of the version attribute >>> on >>> the document element? >>> >>> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.2"> >>> <solidColor solid-color="red"/> >>> <rect width="100%" height="100%" >>> onclick="document.documentElement.setAttributeNS(null, >>> 'version', '1.1')"/> >>> </svg> >>> >>> After clicking the rect, is the document in error? >> My thinking is that it is error. This is the same >> as a script adding an element that doesn't exist, or >> as a child of an element that can't contain it, or >> doing something else that is equally bad. > > > >> Do you agree? >>> >>> Also, while I'm talking about solidColor, what is the purpose of the >>> stop element as a child of solidColor? The schema says that it is >>> allowed but I'm not sure why. >> That's a mistake. It shouldn't be there. >> Dean
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2005 01:53:53 UTC