[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Announcement of an I-D


I think that this is a very interesting issue.  Let me ask some questions.

Q1.  If you introduce a media type "image/svg",  you can certainly introduce
SVG-specific fragment
identifiers.  But are you willing to give up referencing into SVG embedded
into XHTML?

Q2.  How do you feel about making fragment identifiers namespace -sensitive?
For example, "if the
root element is of the namespace for SVG, the fragment identifier is
interpreted as ...."

Q3.  If we really want to make fragment identifiers namespace- sensitive, we
can even interpret
different portions of a single fragment identifier differently.  For
example, the first two conditions
are interpreted as XPath and the third condition is interpreted as SVG
fragment identifier, and
the forth condition is intepreted as XPath (i.e., references into XHTML
embedded in the SVG).
How do you feel?

Q3 might be a crazy idea.  But we have to consider non-monolithic XML
seriously, since it is
so common.


-----Original Message-----

>> Although we
>> do not actually believe this I-D is the right place for these media
types, we strongly
>> believe that we need some consistent story for XML-based languages of
>I agree.
>The SVG WG (of which I am chair) plans to submit an Internet Media Type
>registration for SVG once that specification is stable (ie, W3C