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

Re: Appendix G. 12 in SVG 1.1

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 09:34:22 +0100
Message-ID: <18953118390.20021113093422@w3.org>
To: www-svg@w3.org, "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>

Hello Jim, www-svg,

You wrote
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2002Jul/0000.html

> I'm finding it very difficult to understand G. 12  At first reading it
> seems to be saying that I cannot create my own FPI:
> 
> -//JimLey//DTD SVG nothing to do with W3s SVG//EN
> 
> but I don't believe it is possible for the spec to say this. 

You are correct. This language was copied from the XHTML
modularization draft, but is as you say unenforceable.

The "Southern Vineyard Group" could make up their own Wine Markup
Language and use an FPI that included the string "SVG" and have
nothing to do with vector graphics and certainly no need to ask the
SVG WG about it.

This name clash problem with FPIs, which is not really addressed by
the "+" or "-" for registered and unregistered FPIs, is why the
naturally clash-resistant HTTP namespace URI is a better bet in
general.

> Is it possible to make this clearer?

Yes, we plan to make this clearer by removing that part and not
attempting to impose such restrictions. Thanks for your comments.


-- 
 Chris                          mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2002 03:34:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:23 GMT