- From: Paul LeBeau <paul.lebeau@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 05:48:20 +1200
- To: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACfsppAm8t3w0TaT-vw9sgt-RWDq7bL-EsS0c05HstYeMjyn8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Hi all In section 17.3.2 of SVG1.1 (and 18.3.1 of SVG2) it says: - If the SVG fragment identifier addresses a ‘view <http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG2/linking.html#ViewElement>’ element within an SVG document (e.g., MyDrawing.svg#MyView or MyDrawing.svg#xpointer(id('MyView'))) then *the closest ancestor ‘svg <http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG2/struct.html#SVGElement>’ element is displayed in the viewport*. Any view specification attributes included on the given ‘ view <http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG2/linking.html#ViewElement>’ element override the corresponding view specification attributes on the closest ancestor ‘svg <http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG2/struct.html#SVGElement>’ element. How should "the closest ancestor ‘svg’ element is displayed" be interpreted? It seems to suggest that the view viewBox should be applied to the nested <svg> and only the nested svg should be rendered. But that's not what FF and Batik do (Chrome & IE don't appear to support view IRIs). The next bullet point seems to make that interpretation even more explicit: "the document fragment defined by the closest ancestor ‘svg’ <http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/struct.html#SVGElement> element is displayed" In fact both FF and Batik appear to apply the view viewBox to the outermost <svg> element, not the closest ancestor. So is this a bug in the browsers, an error in the spec, or am I misinterpreting the text? Thanks Paul
Attachments
- image/svg+xml attachment: test_view_nested.svg
Received on Monday, 15 September 2014 17:49:09 UTC