W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: A plea for better documents in next SVG 1.1 iteration

From: Dean Jackson <dean@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 23:01:38 +1000
To: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com
Cc: www-svg@w3.org, chris@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020420130138.GA23247@grorg.org>
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, AndrewWatt2001@aol.com wrote:

> I would like to make a request for a better range of documents to be made 
> available in the next iteration of the SVG 1.1 spec.

The next release of SVG 1.1 will include a zipped HTML version
and (most probably) a PDF version. 
 
I also apologise for the lack of these in the current last
call draft. I sincerely hope it didn't put you and others completely
off reviewing the document.

> Having only fragmented (X)HTML docs in a Last Call WD is far from 
> satisfactory. 

OK, I can tell you're not happy, but we only ever produce
one normative version of the specification: the HTML.
While that may not satisfy you, I don't think it is "far from 
satisfactory" in general. However, I understand your point
and will thus provide as much as I can in the next release.

> Why wasn't the Last Call WD delayed for a day so that a large 
> single (X)HTML file, a zipped file and a PDF option could be made available?

It was quite important to release on that particular day. 
I just ran out of time producing the two extra versions.
The PDF in particular can take a fair bit of work to
get right (this is why I say "most probably" above - the number
one priority is the HTML by chapter version)

Are you sure you want a single *huge* HTML file? Why is that
more use than a fragmented one (apart from printing, in
which case you could use the PDF, if it exists!). 

> The PDF in particular is invaluable for cross checking parts of the spec.

Yes, but remember we don't guarantee the PDF version to be exactly
accurate.

Dean
Received on Saturday, 20 April 2002 09:04:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:22 GMT