Re: [1.2T-LC] Comments on Last Call WD of SVG T1.2 (ACTION-2315, ISSUE-2134)

Hi Erik,

Erik Dahlström a écrit :
> Cyril Concolato wrote:
> 
>> * Section 5.6
>> The following sentence is unclear:
>> "If an event listener is registered on a referenced element, then the actual target for the event will be the SVGElementInstance  object within the "instance tree" corresponding to the > given referenced element."
>> What is the difference with the next paragraph ?
> 
> This sentence (and most of this section I believe) was taken from SVG 1.1 (see [1]). The difference between the two paragraphs is that it talks about event listeners. The first paragraph (the sentence you quote) might be redundant, but it looks like a simplification (or high-level description) of the second paragraph. The WG prefers not to change this.
I understand.

> 
>> In this section, the spec explain the transfer of attribute from a use element to an hypothetical g element. 
>> In this explanation, why is the 'xlink:href' of a use element transfered to the generated content? What is the purpose?
> 
> The spec states that 'xlink:href' is not transferred to the "generated g element". Perhaps this was a misunderstanding? See the bullet point list:
> "In the generated content, the 'use' will be replaced by 'g', where all attributes from the 'use' element _except_ for 'x', 'y', 'xml:base' and 'xlink:href' are transferred to the generated 'g' element."
Indeed, that was a misreading.

> 
>> I think there is an editing mistake in this section. It says: 
>> "except for resolution of relative IRI references as noted above and until the referenced elements are modified. 
>> Note also that any changes to the used element are immediately reflected in the generated content. " 
>> The first sentence is incomplete.
> 
> This "incomplete sentence" was supposed to be read with the other half of the sentence above the bullet point list. It has been combined in the latest draft, see [2].
That's a lot better. Thank you.

> 
>> Could you add a clarification explaining what happens to id and xml:id attributes in the deep-cloned tree? 
>> For example, between examples 05_13.svg and 05_14.svg, ids have been remove. Please explain also what happens to 
>> xlink:href attributes  especially that internal references to the cloned tree are replaced by 'scoped' references.
> 
> It does say before the example 05_14.svg that it shows "the visual effect". Nothing says that that is the exact equivalent of 05_13.svg. If you wanted to copy/clone id:s that would be fine, as long as they are never exposed to the DOM and don't affect your processing. The WG resolved to leave the example as-is, mainly because it would be confusing if the document had id:s in the "conceptually cloned 'g' element" given that an element can be use:d multiple times.
I agree with your explanation. I just think it would be beneficial to the reader/implementer. But I'm fine with the current text.


> 
>> Example "image-use-base.svg" contains errors. The use element does not have width and height attributes.
> 
> Correct, the example has been fixed, see [2].
Thanks.

> 
>> According to the example image-use-base.svg, the content of xml:base is not simply transfered to the "generated 'g'  element" but 
>> the xml:base is resolved before transfering in it to the generated 'g' element. Could you clarify this process?
> 
> See response to your comment about 'xlink:href' above, xml:base is not transferred to the "generated 'g' element".
Indeed. 

> 
> Please let us know if this satisfies your comment.
I'm satisfied. Thanks.

Cyril
> 
> Thanks
> /Erik
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/struct.html#UseElement
> [2] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.2T/publish/struct.html#UseElement
> 


-- 
Cyril Concolato
Maître de Conférences/Associate Professor
Groupe Mutimedia/Multimedia Group
Département Traitement du Signal et Images
/Dept. Signal and Image Processing
Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Télécommunications
46 rue Barrault
75 013 Paris, France
http://tsi.enst.fr/~concolat

Received on Saturday, 18 October 2008 19:29:08 UTC