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

Re: encoding="iso-8859-1" & http://validator.w3.org

From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 10:02:31 +0200
Message-ID: <3F092917.7000809@pinkjuice.com>
To: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>, www-svg@w3.org

Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:

 > If you look with a little care, there is an example URI included:
 > http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/images/shapes/rect01.svg

Yes I know, I did look with care, and I even took the time to supply you 
with lots of validation results for that SVG from four different validators.

You said that it doesn't validate, but it does. The issue you are 
experiencing is not with the SVG, but with the validator at
http://validator.w3.org/ .

 > here is an example of the validation error message:
 > "I was not able to extract a character encoding labeling from any of
 > the
 > valid sources for such information. Without encoding information it is
 > impossible to validate the document...."

Only if the SVGs would be encoded in something other than UTF-8 or 
UTF-16 they would have to have an encoding declaration:

"In the absence of external character encoding information (such as MIME 
headers), parsed entities which are stored in an encoding other than 
UTF-8 or UTF-16 must begin with a text declaration (see 4.3.1 The Text 
Declaration) containing an encoding declaration:"


 > This problem is general to all the images I have checked.

As others on this list have also explained to you, you are describing a 
problem with
http://validator.w3.org/ ,
so please report that issue at
http://validator.w3.org/feedback.html ,
supplying the error message and URL you list above. TIA.

 > please can you respond to the original query posted below?

Yes, I can try again:

 >     encoding="iso-8859-1" & http://validator.w3.org

I don't understand what you mean by
   'encoding="iso-8859-1" & http://validator.w3.org',
and how iso-8859-1 relates to the problem.

 >     Is there a great reason why the SVG images* in the spec:
 >     http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/ don't validate?

Which SVGs don't validate? As you know since at least days, you can use 
online validators listed on
http://www.pinkjuice.com/check/ ,
and as you know since at least some days, http://validator.w3.org/ has 
various issues. The people at this list here (www-svg@w3.org) typically 
can't do anything about it; but the people at 
http://validator.w3.org/feedback.html are the right address, and should 
be able to fix it.

 >     Is there a plan to validate SVG images at some time in the future?

Which SVGs are invalid?

To show that an SVG (or any other XML document) is invalid, I recommend 
to use multiple good validators, not just one single validator that 
states on it's result page for XML resources:
"Note: The Validator XML support has some limitations."

 >     This seems a rather poor practice, web accessibility and SVG have
 >     such great potential!

I can't see why you would repeat a shouted statement like this after 
being informed (see the other posts in this thread) that the issue is 
not with the SVG.

 >     thanks
 >     Jonathan Chetwynd
 >     http://www.peepo.com/svg/!home.svg
 >     *http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/images/shapes/rect01.svg

This SVG is valid (there has been no sign that it's invalid), please see 
the previous mail.


Received on Monday, 7 July 2003 04:03:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:46:56 UTC