- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 21:48:29 +0200
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org
* Chris Lilley wrote:
>Not that I can think of. The language is SVG, the baseProfile is Tiny,
>and the version is 1.1. Concatenation seems the best way to describe
>that - SVG Tiny 1.1.
Consider
<svg version="1.1" baseProfile="tiny"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
<path d="M275,175 v-150 a150,150 0 0,0 -150,150 z"
fill="yellow" stroke="blue" stroke-width="5" />
</svg>
This does not seem to be a conforming SVG Tiny 1.1 document
fragment, is it a "Valid SVG Tiny 1.1" document? Without a
definition that's difficult to tell. And if it is, we would
likely confuse Validator users.
>I don't see that the limited XML support is relevant to the content.
It's not, but it's relevant to what statements the Validator
makes about the content, you could have
<?xml hello world?>
<svg version="1.1" baseProfile="tiny"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" />
which the Validator currently considers "valid" even though
it is not even well-formed. To avoid confusion about this,
the Validator always notes its limited XML support in the
result.
>Could you define "refers to" ?
A document refers to a specific DTD by using a matching FPI
for the external subset.
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Friday, 27 May 2005 19:47:42 UTC