- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:46:22 +0200
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
Jonas Sicking wrote: > Having validators validate SVG fragments according to the full SVG > (1.1?) spec makes a lot of sense to me. Yes, that does, and that is most likely what validator.nu will do eventually. But there needs to be a clear distinction made between what is considered conforming at the DOM level, and what is actually possible to represent in the serialisation. The problem is that the elements and attributes in foreign namespaces (excluding HTML, MathML and XLink) cannot be represented in the text/html serialisation of SVG. This means that something that may look like a namespace-prefixed element or attribute is not actually treated as a foreign namespaced element or attribute, and is thus non-conforming. -- Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software http://lachy.id.au/ http://www.opera.com/
Received on Tuesday, 8 September 2009 16:47:25 UTC