- From: Kalle Raita <kraita@nvidia.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:19:40 +0100
- To: <www-svg@w3.org>
Hi All, In the test struct-discard-206-t there is the following passage: <discard xml:id="discard1" xlink:href="#r1" begin="2s"/> <discard xml:id="discard2" xlink:href="#r2" begin="2s"/> <discard xml:id="discard3" xlink:href="#r3" begin="2s"/> <discard xml:id="discard4" xlink:href="#r4" begin="2s"> <discard xml:id="discard4.1" begin="1s"/> </discard> <discard xml:id="discard5" xlink:href="#r5"/> <discard xml:id="discard6" xlink:href="#discard1" begin="1s"/> <discard xml:id="discard7" xlink:href="#discard2" begin="0s"/> <discard xml:id="discard8" xlink:href="#discard3"/> "discard4" is supposed to be discarded based on the reference image. In the code the discard4 element has a discard animation as a child. This would work nicely otherwise, but according to the RNG spec, the discard element cannot contain discard elements. The spec also states the following about unexpected elements in section C.2: "... or a known element that occurs in unexpected location, is not rendered. The nodes in the subtree are not processed beyond including the relevant DOM objects in the document tree. ..." Our interpretation of this is that the element discard4.1 is never processed as it is in unexpected location. Is this correct? Yours, - Kalle Raita Kalle Raita NVIDIA Corporation Tel. +358 40 723 1441 kraita@nvidia.com http://eu.nvidia.com <http://eu.nvidia.com/> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 21 February 2008 15:20:04 UTC