- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 09:02:27 -0400
- To: Craig Northway <craign@cisra.canon.com.au>
- CC: w3c-svg-wg@w3.org, www-svg@w3.org
Craig Northway wrote: >>> current SVG document fragment >>> The XML document sub-tree which starts with the ancestor 'svg' >>> element of a given SVG element, with the requirement that all >>> container elements between the 'svg' >>> and this element are all elements in the SVG language and namespace. >> >> So one always talks about the "current SVG document fragment" of some >> specific node, then? Perhaps that should be made clear in the naming. > > Yes, you do talk about the current SVG document fragment of a node. Are > you suggesting the name of this term should change? I guess that would be too drastic... Perhaps the definition should clearly say that the term only makes sense when reference is made to a particular node? > Perhaps but, I think this is needed to make it clear that only the > elements defined by the W3C SVG language are acceptable. I see. So if I have a <foo> in the W3C SVG namespace then that makes things not work here? That makes sense, but is probably worth an informative example somewhere. >> It seems that there can be no "current SVG document fragment" for a >> node > Yes, thats what I believe. How's this: > > current SVG document fragment > The current SVG document fragment of a element is the XML document > sub-tree which starts with the ancestor 'svg' > <cid:part1.06080305.01090602@cisra.canon.com.au> element. For this > to be a valid current SVG document fragement all container elements > between the 'svg' <cid:part1.06080305.01090602@cisra.canon.com.au> > and this element must be elements in the SVG language and namespace. > That phrasing doesn't address my concern, which is that we clearly say that there may be no current SVG document fragment for a given node (and that all places which talk about current SVG document fragments handle the case when there isn't one in some way, but I suspect that already falls out of the general way rendering is speficied). This also has the same "starts with" problem as "SVG document fragment". Perhaps something like this: ------------------------------------- current SVG document fragment The current SVG document fragment of an element is the XML document sub-tree such that: 1) The sub-tree has an 'svg' element as its root. 2) The sub-tree contains the element in question 3) All ancestors of the element in question in the sub-tree are elements in the SVG language and namespace. ------------------------------------- I couldn't figure out a way to express the three criteria in sentence form without being very long-winded and hard to follow, but I see nothing wong with listing them in a list like this... To modify this definition for 1.2 Full, I believe all you'd have to do is change condition (3) to: 3') All ancestors of the element in question in the sub-tree are elements in the SVG language and namespace and are either the root of the sub-tree or not an 'svg' element. -Boris
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2005 13:06:26 UTC