- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:15:55 +0100
- To: Ola Andersson <Ola.Andersson@ikivo.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org, ian@hixie.ch
Quoting Ola Andersson <Ola.Andersson@ikivo.com>: > * When the content is not well-formed according to the XML 1.0 or > XML 1.1 specifications [XML11 <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11> ] Does this mean that UAs have to implement XML11 in order to support SVG 1.2 Tiny? Could it be made more clear that content does not have to conform to both specifications? E.g. that I can use NEL when my XML declaration says the document is XML version 1.1 and that the document, because of those two things, can not conform to both. This can probably be done by adding a sentence to the above like "Whichever is used." or so... > * When the content is not namespace-well-formed according to the > Namespaces in XML 1.1 specification [XML-NS > <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/> ] Doesn't XML-NS11 allow certain things from XML11 that are not in XML1 and that therefore you can not use XML 1.0? Wouldn't it be easier to talk about namespace-well-formed in the first place and drop the whole well-formed statement as it is made a bit irelevant by this statement? <fd:fd/> ... would be a well-formed document for example... (Sorry for spelling/grammar mistakes in the above.) -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Wednesday, 30 November 2005 16:16:26 UTC