- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 23:38:55 +0900
- To: "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "Cameron McCormack" <cam@mcc.id.au>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, www-archive@w3.org
On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 23:31:24 +0900, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > I may be wrong, but I don't think that's Henri's point. I think we can > all agree that svg served as text/html should never be considered > conformant. I, for one, would love to author a simplified version of SVG that I can just put with text/html on my server, for what it's worth. (E.g. not having to deal with namespaces, XML syntax nonsense, etc.) However, I should note that if the root element does not actually become <svg> my use case vanishes. (I mainly use SVG for images. Though I guess you could change all the requirements for SVG as image too, I do not think that would be a good idea.) -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 4 March 2009 14:40:33 UTC