It's unclear how the format for parameters encoded in a URL are supposed to play with existing URL fragments in SVG.
The current SVG spec lets you combine a timesegment (eg t=10) with (for example) a spacesegment (eg xywh=10,10,20,20 by separating them with an ampersand: test.svg#t=10&xywh=10,10,20,20. The css-linked-params spec is silent on how to combine these existing segment parameters with param(), but presumably we'd use the same model test.svg#t=10&xywh=10,10,20,20¶m(--foo%20blue)? The spec could do with specifying this.
Secondly, assuming we go this way it feels inconsistent that if we have multiple parameters, we don't use an ampersand to separate them
test.svg#t=10&xywh=10,10,20,20¶m(--foo%20blue)param(--bar%20red)test.svg#t=10&xywh=10,10,20,20¶m(--foo%20blue)¶m(--bar%20red)
The second one feels more correct to me, but at the moment the spec says no ampersand is used.
It's unclear how the format for parameters encoded in a URL are supposed to play with existing URL fragments in SVG.
The current SVG spec lets you combine a timesegment (eg
t=10) with (for example) a spacesegment (egxywh=10,10,20,20by separating them with an ampersand:test.svg#t=10&xywh=10,10,20,20. Thecss-linked-paramsspec is silent on how to combine these existing segment parameters withparam(), but presumably we'd use the same modeltest.svg#t=10&xywh=10,10,20,20¶m(--foo%20blue)? The spec could do with specifying this.Secondly, assuming we go this way it feels inconsistent that if we have multiple parameters, we don't use an ampersand to separate them
test.svg#t=10&xywh=10,10,20,20¶m(--foo%20blue)param(--bar%20red)test.svg#t=10&xywh=10,10,20,20¶m(--foo%20blue)¶m(--bar%20red)The second one feels more correct to me, but at the moment the spec says no ampersand is used.