- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 14:21:17 +0200
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On May 1, 2009, at 21:13 , Doug Schepers wrote:
> Correct, we haven't worked out the details, but we do plan to
> "decommission" @xlink:href, allowing @null:href and/or @null:src in
> its place. The only open questions, IIRC, are whether @null:href
> and @null:src can be used interchangeably, or if @null:href is for
> "outbound" links and @null:src for "inbound" ones
I think that we're much better off with separating the semantics of
href and src, and not adding two attributes (which then need one to
take precedence, and complicates generic scripting, etc.).
> The <param> element would be used, for example, as a child of the
> <use> or <animation> elements, where it's referencing other SVG
> files which can take parameters. In other words, it would be used
> like it is in <object>:
>
> <use xlink:href="somefile.svg#someElement">
> <param name="color" value="cornflowerblue"/>
> </use>
This is interesting, but may prove tricky. The inheritance of <use>
content is already expletived up and the cause of a number of
implementation annoyances (notably caching optimisations), throwing in
parameters might make it even more complex. It might not be ideal, but
have you considered reusing <object> instead? You'd get <param> free,
and you could define that for SVG content the inheritance is more
sensible than that which <use> provides.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 12:21:54 UTC