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

Re: [SVGMobile12] more on data types

From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:00:05 +0200
Message-Id: <09451853-2EA6-417A-98B4-147F2BED4CCC@expway.fr>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>

On Jun 27, 2006, at 18:33, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:09:28 +0200, Doug Schepers  
> <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com> wrote:
>> Yes, CSS has a different behavior here than SVG. SVG follows the  
>> stricter
>> parsing rules of XML.
> XML only has case-sensitive matching for attribute and element  
> names. This is irrelevant to XML parsers.

It is indeed irrelevant to the parsing, but nevertheless relevant to  
the context. When in XML context it is rather typical to expect case- 

> I guess this is correct since you don't want to have things like
>  fill="/* */red"
> and such...


>> Neither style attributes nor style elements are not allowed in SVG  
>> Tiny, so again this is only an issue for Full. In any case, SVG  
>> does not dictate the behavior of the CSS lexical space, which  
>> includes the lexical values of the style attribute and element.
>> It should be noted, though, that the value space of this attribute  
>> value
>> should be the same as that of SVG, even if the lexical space is  
>> different. This is our aim.
> Shouldn't you try to converge with the CSS WG on this?

I don't think any convergence is needed. Inside the style attribute  
and element, the rules defined by the CSS specification apply, which  
is to say that properties and values are case-insensitive, while  
element and attribute names, as well as a few other things, are not  
(http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#q6). Other contexts, such as  
SVG's property attributes, are "not under the control of CSS" (as  
explained in CSS 2.1 quoted above) and fall under SVG's rules.

>> Attribute values should be parsed exactly according to the  
>> definition and
>> their data type. If the type has EBNF rules, or externally referenced
>> definitions, those should be followed.
> Ok, so http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-SVGMobile12-20051207/ 
> types.html#DataTypeColor points to http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD- 
> SVGMobile12-20051207/painting.html#colorSyntax which points me to  
> the HTML 4 specification (without giving a reference) http:// 
> www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/types.html#h-6.5 which  
> gives values such as "Red", "Silver" etc. and explicitly says they  
> are case-insensitive. Apparently this is contrary to what the SVG  
> WG actually wants...

That's for HTML, for XHTML those rules are expressly changed, see  
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#h-4.11. A reference wouldn't hurt though.

Robin Berjon
    Senior Research Scientist
    Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Tuesday, 27 June 2006 17:00:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:08 UTC