W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > July 2010

Re: SVG 1.1 Second Edition Last Call Comments

From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:02:01 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTimzQ1R6gkQWhMogKqn0M_UWRcqRezpk11shE9Fd@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday, June 29, 2010, 1:40:07 PM, Innovimax wrote:
>
> IS> Dear all,
>
> IS> Here are few comments
>
> Thanks for the comments,  Mohamed. These are being tracked under ISSUE-2344
> and I have ACTION-2821 to update the spec in response to your comment.
>

Perfect

>
> IS> * ECMAScript is now at 5th Edition of December 2009
>
> It is. I'm  just checking which edition of ECMAScript is in fact
> implemented by current implementations before updating that reference. There
> is a concern regarding language changes so we want to be sure to reference
> the correct edition here.
>

Fair enough


>
> IS> * The latest ICC.1 spec is ICC.1:2004-10 (Version 4.2.0.0)
> Yes.
>
> IS> * The latest version of ISO8601 is 2004
> IS> http://www.iso.org/iso/fr/catalogue_detail?csnumber=40874
>
> OK
>
> IS> * JPEG the reference has now been updated to ISO/IEC 10918-1:1994/Cor
> 1:2005
> IS> * SRGB has been updated to IEC 61966-2-1/Amd 1:2003
>
> Thanks for pointers to the latest JPEG and sRGB specs.
>
> IS> * Unicode 5.2.0 has been released
>
> Yes. As XML 5th edition specifically links to the 'latest' version of
> Unicode and since the I18n Core WG refer to it also in their discussions of
> bidi it seems clear we should reference the latest one, too.
>
>
> IS> * XMLBase :  The link is good but the test should say that it's the
> IS> Second Edition
>
> Agreed.
>
> IS> * XML-NS should point to the third Edition
>
> Indeed.
>
> IS> * XLINK should be updated to XLINK 1.1 which is now a REC and remove
> IS> XLINK 1.1 from informative reference
>
> Yes, good catch. In fact most existing SVG 1.1 content is more conformant
> to XLink 1.1 than to 1.0 (omits xlink:type="simple" in the instance).
>
>
Even better !!


> IS> * XPointer is at the status of Working draft and should not be in the
> IS> normative reference
>
> Its also not referred to anywhere from the rest of the spec, so this
> reference has been deleted.
>
> IS> * NVDL has been updated to ISO/IEC 19757-4:2006/Cor 1:2008
>
> OK
>
> IS> * OpenType has been updated to 1.6
>
> We would like to check on implementation status before updating that one.
>

Fair enough


>
> IS> * SMIL1 has been outdated by SMIL3
>
> Yes.
>
> IS> Please add a link to Relax NG version of SVG 1.1
>
> If one existed, we would happily link to it. A good RNG I mean, not some
> namespace-less travesty auto-generated from the DTD :) but we do not have
> one as yet.
>
> Do you happen to have one?
>

I just forwarded the question to ISO SC 34 people with my W3C Liaison hat



> If not, we plan to create one in due course, but it won't be under /TR and
> will be a separate publication. We would probably start with the SVG 1.2T
> RNG, removing 1.2-specific elements and adding the elements and attributes
> that are in 1.1 but not in 1.2T.
>

That sounds like a reasonnable plan B

Thanks

Mohamed
-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 
Received on Monday, 12 July 2010 15:02:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:45 GMT