W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2006

Re: Assumption in the SVG specifications

From: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:11:20 +0200
Message-Id: <p062309a9c11c9e4d3473@[]>
To: Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@enst.fr>
Cc: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>

At 16:04  +0200 31/08/06, Cyril Concolato wrote:
>Hi Dave,
>>>So we ended up saying that image should not point to vector 
>>>graphics because otherwise, the same content would have led to 
>>>different behaviors in  a 1.1 Full and 1.2 Tiny player.
>>so you forbid what 1.1 allowed?  I got lost here.
>I forgot to mention that SVG 1.1 Tiny did put a restriction on the 
>image element (http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/#imageelement):
>" SVGB and SVGT require support of the JPEG and PNG formats on the 
>image element. SVGB also requires support of SVG format on the image 
>So SVG T 1.2 from that point is somewhere in between SVG 1.1 Tiny 
>and SVG 1.1 Full, just like SVG 1.1 Basic.

So, SVGB 1.1 allowed use of <image> for SVG images (one presumes 
un-animated), but this permission is orphaned in 1.2, where this is 
NOT permitted.

What fun we have!
David Singer
Apple Computer/QuickTime
Received on Thursday, 31 August 2006 14:43:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:14 UTC