W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2006

Re: Assumption in the SVG specifications

From: Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@enst.fr>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:04:45 +0200
Message-ID: <44F6EC7D.5020501@enst.fr>
To: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>
Cc: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>

Hi Dave,

>> So we ended up saying that image should not point to vector graphics 
>> because otherwise, the same content would have led to different 
>> behaviors in  a 1.1 Full and 1.2 Tiny player.
> so you forbid what 1.1 allowed?  I got lost here.
I forgot to mention that SVG 1.1 Tiny did put a restriction on the image 
element (http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/#imageelement):
" SVGB and SVGT require support of the JPEG and PNG formats on the image 
element. SVGB also requires support of SVG format on the image element."

So SVG T 1.2 from that point is somewhere in between SVG 1.1 Tiny and 
SVG 1.1 Full, just like SVG 1.1 Basic.


Received on Thursday, 31 August 2006 14:05:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:09 UTC