- From: David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net>
- Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:24:14 -0400
- To: "'Rik Cabanier'" <cabanier@gmail.com>, "'Alex Danilo'" <alex@abbra.com>
- Cc: "'www-svg'" <www-svg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <002701cc7192$52575200$f705f600$@net>
Rik writes: inline SVG is part of the HTML document so it could be calculated by looking at the size of its container. Basically, it would just follow the same rules as regular HTML elements (including how percentages are calculated if an ancestor has a CSS transform) That's what I'd expect to have happen. Later he continues: I believe that in the future, the author will typically create the HTML and the inline SVG. We shouldn't think about them as separate worlds. (I think there was consensus about this at the Seattle F2F.) And that is certainly consistent with the annoying agitation I began offering the HTML WG some years back [1,2,3]. Over time, I've come to think of it a bit differently though: "The author will typically create the SVG with little bursts of occasional HTML as needed (e.g., tables, form elements and API's). " After all, HTML is a far less powerful environment than SVG and it behooves us to keep that in mind as planning for their coexistence takes place. HTML is the noisy little cousin that demands a lot of attention but ultimately accomplishes much less. As a medium to enable the expression of human thought, SVG is far richer than HTML, stemming from its primary metaphor and from the mapping of that metaphor onto the cerebrum. Cheers David [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007JanMar/0344.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007JanMar/0492.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007JanMar/0555.html
Received on Monday, 12 September 2011 21:24:41 UTC