W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2007

Re: SVG Validator

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 11:24:56 +0900
Message-Id: <A74EDCB5-E967-4302-B4B2-C33D5D409453@w3.org>
Cc: www-validator Community <www-validator@w3.org>, www-svg@w3.org
To: Helder Miguel Magalhães <helder.magalhaes@efacec.pt>

Hello Helder,

On Jul 31, 2007, at 01:04 , Helder Miguel Magalhães wrote:

> Dear Validator team,
>
> First of all, congratulations on the (SVG) validation service. It's  
> a very useful way to push the community torwards standards  
> compliance, though it (SVG) currently seems a bit outdated.

It is, indeed. I seem to recall it has been without maintainer for a  
while, but that there were SVG hackers willing to create a new  
validator for their favorite language. FWIW, different validators are  
generally made by different people.

>  Looking forward for Unicorn port!

Yes :) but, before being made unicorn-happy, it first has to work.

>  In the meantime, I've made a few tests (http://jiggles.w3.org/ 
> svgvalidator/) and would like to leave a few comments:

Thanks, I'm copying the www-svg mailing-list in this reply, since  
that list should have more people knowledgeable about this tool. If  
there are plans to revive the tool, maybe we could open a bugzilla  
entry for it?

> «
> error #XXX: line: XXX
> The 'version' attribute of the <svg> element has a fixed value: it  
> can not be changed.
> »
> This isn't true: (currently) one is able to specify version,  
> according to SVG Mobile 1.2 specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/ 
> SVGMobile12/struct.html#SVGElement)
>
> «
> error #XXX: line: XX
> The <svg> element does not allow a 'baseProfile' attribute  
> belonging to the "SVG" namespace.
> »
> Again, this is (currently) valid, according to SVG Mobile 1.2  
> specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/ 
> struct.html#SVGElement)
>
> «
> warning #XXX: line: XXX
> The SVG validator could not compare the 'width' attribute and the  
> 'rx' attribute of the <rect> element: the unit identifier for the  
> 'width' attribute is not an absolute unit identifier.
> »
> This seems to be a coherence validation which is a smart idea,  
> though it seems possible to compare this using relative unit  
> identifier: if both are relative (and defined, obviously), they can  
> also be compared.
>
> All tests performed using version 1.0 of the validator. Also, the  
> upload option of the validation seems to be broken:
> «
> Servlet has thrown exception:java.lang.IllegalArgumentException:  
> Not a directory: J391175046-0
> »
>
> Finally, as the feedback link of validator page (http:// 
> jiggles.w3.org/svgvalidator/) is broken (http://jiggles.w3.org/ 
> svgvalidator/Feedback.html), I take the opportunity to point this  
> out and also ask you to forward this information if necessary.
>
> Best regards,
>
>   Helder Magalhães
>
> --
> Helder Miguel Alves Magalhães
> helder.magalhaes@efacec.pt


regards,
-- 
olivier
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 02:24:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:37 GMT