- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:21:42 +0200
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Hello, why to change this for SVG1.1 now? There should be no such substantial change in this new edition, I think. On the other hand, at least the validator for SVG 1.1 with its restrictions helps many authors to fix major bugs. Of course, the restrictions result in a few situations to wrong information. However the new experimental validator is much worse. This is used if no doctype is provided. For example for SVG tiny 1.2 the validator results are practically always completely nonsense and the suggestions of the experimental validator are ridiculous . Until there is a more reliable validator for documents without doctypes (the same applies for example for the newest XHTML variant XHTML+RDFa 1.0), I think the old doctype is still pretty useful for authors wanting their documents to be tested. Typically viewers do not care about it - unfortunately not even about attributes like version - therefore it is practically not problem to have the doctype within the document together with version and profile indication. And once viewers take into account the version information, this will be an advantage for authors anyway. Olaf
Received on Friday, 13 August 2010 10:48:59 UTC