W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > February 2003

Re: Request for 1.2 (2.0) ....consistent use of commas in XML attributes

From: Robert Diblasi <RDIBLAS@wpo.it.luc.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 09:23:20 -0600
Message-Id: <se534d0c.095@wpo.it.luc.edu>
To: <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>

Robin,

thank you for pointing this out.....I thought something was some  inconsistency .....but at least now I know why :-)
Thank you for sharing you knowledge.

We all learn by sharing what we know
Robert A. DiBlasi
rdiblasi@svgnotebook.com 
http://www.svgnotebook.com 
Member of the Chicago SVG Group: Chicago IL.



>>> Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr> 02/19/03 08:39AM >>>
Robert Diblasi wrote:
> Question:  Is there any reason for the inconsistent use of 
 > commas in attributes in the SVG Specification?

In most cases I would say yes. I certainly wish there were more consistency 
there (in some cases you can also have semicolons iirc) but I'm afraid it's too 
late to change much.

> Question:
> Could someone let me know if  requiredFeatures can be separated by commas.
 > If the answer is "yes it can be separated by commas", then the description
 > of requiredFeatures is no correct because it explicitly describes how the
 > list of features is separated.

Technically, requiredFeatures *could* have been comma-separated because it is a 
list of XML Names which in turn cannot contain commas. However 
requiredExtensions (which is closely related) is a list of URIs, and URIs can 
contain commas which makes them undesirable as separators. Thus using space-only 
here makes those two very similar attribute consistent, even if it is at the 
cost of inconsistency with some others.

-- 
Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Research Engineer, Expway        http://expway.fr/ 
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE  8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2003 10:23:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:24 GMT