- From: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:46:49 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <AANLkTikfPnj0Rq4fagY4CWLEHAr06VXn5KNfa8_Bkd62@mail.gmail.com>
Boris, This was not necessarily directed at Mozilla. What I really just want to understand is the reference rendering for all cases so I see if I can help fix WebKit's svg-as-img implementation so that it can be interoperable with the other browsers. Jeff On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > On 9/14/10 11:12 AM, Jeff Schiller wrote: > >> Argh, >> >> http://codedread.com/browser-tests/svg-image/html.html >> >> Sorry! >> > > Note that the difference between <object>/<embed>/<img>and <iframe> in the > first row there is purposeful in Gecko: we use the specified width/height, > if it's in pixels, for <iframe>s, because iframe intrinsic sizes do not > depend on the size of the <svg>, unlike the other cases. So for an <iframe> > its size is completely specified in the parent document and has nothing to > do with the size of the contained content, which is sized independently. > > For the other three elements, the sizing works just like it would with the > <svg> inlined into the parent document, or at least that's the goal. > > The scrollbars in the second row are just there because it's a subdocument > with the content overflowing the bounds of its frame. The fourth row > doesn't have them, because in that case the <svg> doesn't overflow, and > since it has overflow:hidden itself it keeps the circle from overflowing too > (the <circle> overflows the <svg> in that row). > > Are you expecting the second and fourth rows to render the same way that > the first and third ones do, by the way? If so, why? > > -Boris >
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 18:47:36 UTC