Re: [SVGMobile12] SVGT12-207: Too many issues (again)

On Jan 31, 2006, at 3:58 PM, Marc Verstaen wrote:

>
> Considering the number of implementations for SVG-T 1.2 already  
> available, I
> am not this proves anything about the specs of SVG-Tiny 1.2. We are  
> not
> talking about SVG 1.2 here...

The goal is not to have just any implementations but fully  
interoparable implementations that meet the conformance requirements  
of the spec. Without a thorough test suite, there's no evidence that  
this is the case. And there are known ambiguities and contradictions  
in the latest Last Call draft.

Furthermore, if the spec requires things that are contrary to other  
specs, it means certain classes of implementations (those that also  
support other specs) cannot possibly be interoperable.

Therefore, rushing the spec as-is will not be an aid to  
interoperability. If some implementations can have de facto  
interoperability that is nice, but we should not lock in a spec that  
actually could actually harm interoperability.

Regards,
Maciej