W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2008

Re: SVG in HTML proposal

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:53:34 +0200
Cc: public-html@w3.org, "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BF8D0E6A-88B8-415F-AE3E-9B15E5F40C3E@berjon.com>
To: Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>

Hi,

it's good to see some progress on this.

On Jul 14, 2008, at 10:05 , Erik Dahlström wrote:
> Note that this is not a formally published document, nor is it on  
> the Recommendation Track. It is merely an inter-group proposal. This  
> document is a work in progress, and may change due to feedback.

Some nitpicks:

• It looks as if at times some constraints from the XML specification  
are recommended to be copied over (e.g. "If there are attribute tokens  
with the same name it is a parse error"). As usual, I think it is  
better to do this by reference.

• "it is possible to do prefixing of attributes as well": no, you just  
can't. Attributes aren't in any namespace, they can't have a prefixes.

• Are the ext/fallback combo a good solution? Are there examples of a  
language in which fallback syntax (as opposed to some hacks) is  
actually used? The example that is given could equally be written with  
an svg:script or svg:style that turns the display on for <svg> and  
removes the replacement image from the document (it's already like  
what is done in the <fallback> there). I'd personally like to see more  
examples of this to justify the cost of adding a new element.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2008 07:56:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:56 UTC