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

Re: SVG 1.2 11.4 Window Object

From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 12:02:01 +0200
Message-ID: <3EDDC399.2050904@expway.fr>
To: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org

Tobias Reif wrote:
> Robin Berjon wrote:
>  > Yes, but forcing the viewers to only output valid SVG would force them
>  > to ship with a validator. I think that's too high a constraint.
> 
> ... which I didn't request.

I was just clarifying your clarification ;)

> If someone constructs a document in memory, eg via the DOM and ECMA 
> Script, then it should get serialized as similiar as possible to that 
> document (DOM tree). (I'd prefer if this would be done in a predictable 
> way by all implementations, eg by following the same single standard or 
> other spec, and if options for pretty-printing were available.)

DOM 3 LS could help there. If you have use cases don't hesitate to make them known.

http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-DOM-Level-3-LS-20030226/

> Making sure it's valid could result in significant changes to the 
> document, which, at least as only or default behaviour, isn't desired. A 
> draft for example could be invalid intentionally, and validity of a 
> fragment is not always clearly defined.

AFAIK the DOM people have banged their heads hard on that problem without 
reaching a solution they liked.

-- 
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, 4 June 2003 06:02:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:25 GMT