- From: Sjoerd Visscher <sjoerd@w3future.com>
- Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 17:09:42 +0200
- To: www-svg@w3.org
It looks like this whole discussion is based on a misunderstanding of the WebCGM spec [1]. The WebCGM spec and the de-facto HTML standard are not incompatible. Especially the clarification given by Chris Lilley in [2] is not how I think the WebCGM spec should be read. If Chris had been right, then there would have been no reason for the WebCGM spec to say that _replace only applies to CGM-to-CGM, as it would have been very useful for a CGM file loaded in an iframe. _replace is used in WebCGM for images that are loaded in HTML with the img element. In CGM-to-CGM, the link target would be set as the src attribute of the img element. And as HTML is not allowed as image format, _replace is not applicable to CGM-to-HTML. The problem of reading the WebCGM spec lies in the fact that is undefined what creates a frame. There is no doubt that html frame elements create frames. An iframe does so too (as the name implies). There only remains one problem, the object tag. Does it create a frame? I did some test, by loading an image, an html document and an svg document in an object element. Internet Explorer always creates a frame. Firefox does not create a frame for an image, but does so for html and svg. Opera creates a frame for html, but not for images or svg. (Although I'm not so sure about SVG, as Opera does not seem to create a frame for an SVG file in an Iframe either.) This explains why Boris Zbarsky was confused by the meaning of _replace, because Firefox always creates a frame for svg content, so _replace never applies and always means the same as _self. There is one other thing: if the HTML elements and the SVG elements are in the same document, and the link points to another SVG document, then _replace could mean that the root SVG element is replaced *in the DOM* by the documentElement of the targeted SVG document. (A kind of XInclude operation.) This probably creates more problems than it solves and _replace should in this case do the same as _self. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-WebCGM/REC-03-CGM-IC.html#webcgm_3_1_2_2 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2006Jul/0031.html -- Sjoerd Visscher http://w3future.com/weblog/
Received on Sunday, 13 August 2006 15:09:50 UTC