- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:53:34 +0200
- To: Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org, "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
Hi, it's good to see some progress on this. On Jul 14, 2008, at 10:05 , Erik Dahlström wrote: > Note that this is not a formally published document, nor is it on > the Recommendation Track. It is merely an inter-group proposal. This > document is a work in progress, and may change due to feedback. Some nitpicks: • It looks as if at times some constraints from the XML specification are recommended to be copied over (e.g. "If there are attribute tokens with the same name it is a parse error"). As usual, I think it is better to do this by reference. • "it is possible to do prefixing of attributes as well": no, you just can't. Attributes aren't in any namespace, they can't have a prefixes. • Are the ext/fallback combo a good solution? Are there examples of a language in which fallback syntax (as opposed to some hacks) is actually used? The example that is given could equally be written with an svg:script or svg:style that turns the display on for <svg> and removes the replacement image from the document (it's already like what is done in the <fallback> there). I'd personally like to see more examples of this to justify the cost of adding a new element. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2008 07:56:23 UTC