W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Full 1.1 Test Suite Status Updated

From: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:53:57 +0100
To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.vmbnr4r3geuyw5@localhost>
On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 01:04:37 +0100, Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com> wrote:

> Hi Patrick,
>
> 	For the tests:
...
> WOFF is not an option for these tests. They are aimed at SVG user agents,
> not compound document handling web browsers disguised as universal  
> application
> platforms facilitating operating system redundancy:-).

Alex is right, the tests cannot require support for WOFF since that's not  
a required part of SVG 1.1 (or CSS2.0).

> WOFF is a _Working Draft_ last published on 27th July 2010. It is a long
> way from Recommendation status and as such, completely unsuitable for  
> being
> referenced in any test for features in a W3C Recommendation.
>
> I know from your point of view the request seems advantageous for  
> convenience,
> but it is incompatible with the process, and effectively breaks all the
> Tiny implementations being shipped today.

To be clear, the group has not agreed to remove the SVG Fonts in those  
tests, but to add fallback fonts in an additional format(s). I don't think  
that's a breaking change, but I agree with you about the riskiness of  
adding a font format that is still in working draft status.

Would downloadable TTF fonts be any better? I don't mind if there are  
fonts you can download and install on the system, and I don't mind adding  
an additional test that doesn't use text there.
/Erik

-- 
Erik Dahlstrom, Core Technology Developer, Opera Software
Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
Personal blog: http://my.opera.com/macdev_ed
Received on Wednesday, 17 November 2010 15:54:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 17 November 2010 15:54:34 GMT