- From: Andrew Shellshear <Andrew.Shellshear@research.canon.com.au>
- Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 16:58:16 +0200
- To: www-svg@w3.org
- CC: bzbarsky@mit.edu
Boris Zbarsky wrote: >In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005May/0039.html I requested >that the definition of an "SVG document fragment" be clarified, specifically as >regards mixed-namespace contexts. The text in section 5.1.1 [1] does not >clarify this. A simple case that is ambiguous per the current text: > ><svg:svg> > <html:body> > <svg:rect/> > </html:body> ></svg:svg> > >I assume the "SVG document fragment" in this cases contains a single node, but >that's not clear from the text, either in section 5.1.1 or in section 1.6 [2]. > >Also, in the same mail I requested a clarification for what happens with regard >to the "SVG document fragment" when an <svg:svg> has another <svg:svg> as a >descendant. This does not seem to have been clarified. We have added the following clarification to the SVG document fragment definition: In SVG Tiny 1.2 each SVG document fragment must not contain nested <a href="struct.html#SVGElement"><span class="element-name">'svg'</span></a> elements - nested 'svg' elements are <a href="implnote.html#UnsupportedProps">unsupported elements</a>. So - yes, the SVG document fragment in the above case contains a single node, and svg descendant nodes are unsupported, and thus ignored. Thank you for your excellent and thorough review. Please let us know shortly if this does not address your concerns. Andrew.
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2006 14:58:32 UTC