- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:09:51 -0500
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- CC: www-svg@w3.org
Chris Lilley wrote: > We had several requests to cover some background and explain concepts. > We were also asked to have some "why should I care" motivating material > early on. This chapter attempts to do that. Ah, heh. Ok. > Apparently some people like terse specifications and some people like to > know what value is offered and what the spec does for them. We tried to > strike a balance. I guess there's no accounting for taste. Or rather, I guess implementors like to know what they need to implement and not the rest of it. :) > BZ> Similar for overblown phrases like "huge variety of graphical objects" (I > BZ> recommend removing "huge" since it adds nothing to the meaning and again sounds > BZ> like badly-written promotional literature). > > Well, a path can create a theoretically infinite number of shapes :) Well, sure. I'm not saying the sentence is false. Just that it sounded like it was trying really hard to justify to me why paths exist... > BZ> The last bullet point of 2.3 appears to be normative to me. > > Its not, although it does link to a normative conformance criterion. Ah, I see. OK. > We have clarified that the chapter is normative, so there should not be any > confusion now. Agreed. Sounds good to me. Thank you! -Boris
Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2005 01:10:02 UTC