W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-ig@w3.org > April to June 2009

Another draft of SVG book: Draft 2.0

From: Dailey, David P. <david.dailey@sru.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:05:23 -0400
Message-ID: <869C28E394A3274192EF3513D0DBF09115A39D@msfexch01.srunet.sruad.edu>
To: <public-svg-ig@w3.org>
Cc: "Doug Schepers" <schepers@w3.org>
Here is the next version of the SVG Book.

 

http://srufaculty.sru.edu/david.dailey/cs427/StateOfArt-Dailey.html
(same address as before, just better stuff!)

 

We'll call it Draft number 2.

 

I suspect Doug will be moving it to W3C in short order, but if you see
any glaring problems of an immediate nature, please holler and we can
make quick corrections (btw - Doug, I made two small corrections since
the version I sent you, so will be sending a new one today or tomorrow).

 

I like the idea of moving it into a version control system and am happy
with what folks have said about Subversion, but won't be able to go
there for a few weeks in terms of my schedule. Doug and I will also be
talking about the nature of the shared copyright and what that means in
terms of "W3C Document" status.

 

 In the meantime, there is a new and somewhat stable version for folks
to respond to, so I guess until we have a versioning system set up, the
following makes sense??

 

1.       Wait until then to do any thorough reviews, to avoid
duplication of effort

2.       Sign up for review of any particular section that you think
needs immediate attention

3.       Sign up for writing any section that appears to be a priority
(e.g. using CSS in SVG)

4.       E-mail me with any egregious or small mistakes that need to be
corrected soon. 

 

If someone points out something that I plain disagree with, then here's
what makes sense as a temporary sort of editorial policy:

 

1.       If the disagreement is pedagogical or literary, then I will
encourage you to write your own book - someone has to make these
decisions! (seriously, though, I will try to listen despite the toll
that my 107 years of teaching may have taken on my open-mindedness)

2.       If the disagreement is of a technical nature, then if I can't
persuade myself that you are right (even though you probably are) then
I'll defer the question back to this group as a whole. If a majority of
you tell me I'm all wet then I will pout but will probably listen to you
( though I can imagine writing something to the effect that "everyone
but Dailey believes X" to save face) 

 

To get some idea of my editorial style, see the way I handled the issue
of <embed> & <object> & <iframe>. In
http://srufaculty.sru.edu/david.dailey/cs427/StateOfArt-Dailey.html#SVG_
in_HTML (actually, I'm not sure that there was any real disagreement
here, since the last discussions we had here seemed to allow my
conclusion that <embed> wasn't so bad after all. And we still aren't
sure, I think, if <object><param></object> exposes folks to any of those
nasties that Adobe warned about with disabling script in <object>
through ASV.)

 

Have fun!

David

 

 

 
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2009 18:07:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:28:24 UTC