- From: Brian Birtles <bbirtles@mozilla.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 07:57:30 +0900
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Hi Olaf, Thank you for your feedback. (2013/12/17 23:43), Dr. Olaf Hoffmann wrote: > Brian Birtles: > >> a) Make it a CSS property so you can, for example, tweak it with media >> queries to make responsive SVG images. > > If the SVG document is referenced, one can already change it with > a) element view > b) SVG fragment identifiers > c) animation > > Are there additional use cases covered by a property? Yes, please see my previous reply to Alex where I described such a case. > If yes and this matters for content, it might be a good idea > to provide a mechanism as well to have such a feature for > content as well, not just for decoration. I'm afraid I don't understand this comment. >> Issue 1: The property name. >> Proposal: 'viewbox' >> Rationale: Otherwise we end up with 'viewBox', 'viewbox' (for >> SVG-in-HTML) and 'view-box'. It feels like one word to me, or could be >> anyway. > > The name of the attribute is already 'viewBox'. > To avoid confusion for authors, the property should have the same > name as the attribute. To the best of my knowledge, CSS properties don't use camelCase but separate words with '-' and I'm pretty sure that rule is set in stone. So I think it's a choice between 'view-box' and 'viewbox' and since it is possible to use 'viewbox' as the attribute name in some contexts I think it is preferable. Best regards, Brian
Received on Tuesday, 17 December 2013 22:57:57 UTC