- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 18:12:42 +1000
- To: Juergen Roethig <roethig@dhbw-karlsruhe.de>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On 26/06/2014 5:39 PM, Juergen Roethig wrote: > Hello world, > > Am 24.06.2014 23:44, schrieb Tab Atkins Jr.: >> [...] >> >> <!DOCTYPE html> >> <svg viewBox="0 0 10 10" width=100 height=100 style="border: thin >> solid;"> >> <rect x=1 y=1 width=2 height=2 fill=blue ></rect> >> <rect x=1 y=5 width=2px height=2px fill=green></rect> >> </svg> >> >> [...] > > Just a question: Is this really the way we should code SVG in the > future, or even in the present? As in the past, it looked somewhat > different (DOCTYPE, attributes, ...) ... especially the <!DOCTYPE html> > concernes me somehow. > > Regards, > > Juergen Roethig Hello Jurgen, That is not a standalone SVG so to say "is this really the way [that] we should code SVG in the future" is not a valid suggestion. The code above is part SVG and part HTML with loose parsing rules. It's far from well formed XML which a true SVG must be coded in or it fails to render. Also a true SVG must have a .svg extension and not a .htm or .html extension. The below is valid XML. Since you're issue is with HTML where it's optional if attributable values are quoted, then this should be a brought up in another group. <?xml version="1.0"?> <svg viewBox="0 0 10 10" width="100" height="100" style="border: thin solid;" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"> <rect x="1" y="1" width="2" height='2' fill="blue" ></rect> <rect x="1" y="5" width="2px" height="2px" fill="green"></rect> </svg> -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2014 08:13:11 UTC