- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:36:09 +0100
- To: "G. Wade Johnson" <gwadej@anomaly.org>, "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>
- Cc: "Jeff Schiller" <codedread@gmail.com>, "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, www-svg@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:32:18 +0100, G. Wade Johnson <gwadej@anomaly.org> wrote: > So, again, if SVG is currently defined as XML, why would a current tool > read something that is not well-formed XML. A current tool wouldn't, but a patched current tool would. And it would do that because it's relatively cheap to support and allows authors to import SVG embedded in HTML. > I'm sorry if this comes off as confrontational. But, I've spent a lot > of time cleaning up crap that was supposed to be XML (and HTML) that was > passed off with the comment "Why not just change your parser?" A fair comment, I'd say :-) -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 12:37:52 UTC