Re: getSVGDocument()

I think Anne is asking if GetSVGDocument could be marked as an alias  
to contentDocument (and maybe deprecated?).

I'm going to step out on a limb and suggest Anne may be concerned  
about the Acid3 SVG tests requiring a text/xml document to produce an  
SVGDocument (and hence provide GetSVGDocument), which for various  
reasons is non-trivial in a general purpose UA.  This is an issue that  
WebKit also has -- the type of document created is determined by the  
mime/type -- if it was determined by content then the type of a  
document would need to be dynamic to allow for the user replacing the  
content of (for example) n html document with the content of an SVG  

Of course Anne could actually be thinking of something completely  
different, in which case I apologise to him, and raise that problem  
instead :D


On Feb 14, 2008, at 10:43 PM, Anthony Grasso wrote:

> Hi Anne,
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> I was wondering if it's really necessary to keep this method. And  
>> if it is necessary to keep it, if it could simply be defined  
>> equivalently to contentDocument.
> Thank you for your feedback.
> The working group has discussed your issue and we have issued an  
> errata that clarifies the definition of GetSVGDocument. We will be  
> adding the following wording to an errata for GetSVGDocument:
> "This section is informative. The GetSVGDocument method behaves the  
> same as contentDocument if the embedded document is an SVG document,  
> e.g. the value must be the child document's Document object or null  
> if there is no such object. If the embedded document is not an SVG  
> Document, GetSVGDocument returns null."
> We hope the errata addresses your issue. If not, we are happy to  
> consider any other suggestions you may have. Thanks.
> Kind Regards,
> Anthony Grasso

Received on Friday, 15 February 2008 07:06:07 UTC