W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: UA: indicate missing content

From: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:59:56 +0100
Cc: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F768B65E-92C8-49A3-9672-5A9BDDF68950@btinternet.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>

I read the proposed wording and it doesn't address the issue raised.
if width and height are not part of the svg1.2 spec then how would
 >> the user agent should provide a placeholder rectangle or image  
with the position and dimensions specified by the element's attributes,
ever be satisfied?

your supposed solution is at best a hack.

This is a really complex area, and the current solution has by at  
least on correspondent been described as naive.
users will learn little if anything from a broken link.

alt content at least needs to be discussed by a wide audience.
the case against re-introduction of height and width needs to be  
stated clearly, hence my request to erik


Jonathan Chetwynd


+44 (0) 20 7978 1764

On 29 Jul 2008, at 07:40, Doug Schepers wrote:

> Hi, Jonathan-
> Jonathan Chetwynd wrote (on 7/29/08 2:04 AM):
>> Your earlier emails do not appear to meet the needs, as if height  
>> and width are not specified, what else would identify the  
>> checkerboard area?
> You clearly haven't read the proposed wording, which I've pointed  
> you at twice before now:
> "If no adequate fallback content is supplied, the user agent should  
> provide a placeholder rectangle or image with the position and  
> dimensions specified by the element's attributes, if specified, *or  
> custom dimension otherwise*, and the name of the invalid resource as  
> visible text or as a tooltip."
> So, my proposal is that if there are no stated dimensions, the  
> browser renders the filename with a painted area big enough to  
> surround the text.  Others disagree that anything at all should  
> render, but we are still cleaning up the proposal.
>> I don't appreciate your tone, my email was clearly addressed to  
>> erik, and in response to his email.
> I'm not overly concerned which of the SVG WG members you were  
> addressing.  This is a public list, and anyone (even *gasp* SVG WG  
> members!) is free to respond to any message.  You take great  
> liberties with this policy yourself, so please stop calling into  
> question the liberty of others to do the same.
> My message was clear, concise, and polite, and it addressed your  
> issue.  I pointed out the effort we are going to to address your  
> concern. What part of my "tone" didn't you appreciate?
> FWIW, it is disrespectful not to read directed materials before  
> posting; I make a point of following the links you provide, and ask  
> that you extend the same courtesy to others on this list.  To do  
> otherwise wastes everyone's time.
> [1] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.2T/master/linking.html#unresolved-resources
> Regards-
> -Doug Schepers
> W3C Team Contact, WebApps, SVG, and CDF

Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2008 08:00:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:19 UTC