- From: Tim Ruffing via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2025 09:45:40 +0000
- To: public-svg-issues@w3.org
real-or-random has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/svgwg: == Clarify that SVG does not need to be valid XML == The conformance section says: "Additional conformance classes depend on whether the content is also valid and well-formed XML": https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/blob/51ff4ba22b5d1d90f61fc6e388595d3e87d7839f/master/conform.html#L550-L551 I think it should say: "Additional conformance classes depend on whether the content is also well-formed XML". None of the conformance classes require that the document is *valid* XML. (The only requirement that seems to be "imported" from XML is the validity of the id attribute.) Moreover, none of the examples in the entire spec contain a `<!DOCTYPE svg>` declaration which would be required to be valid XML 1.0. (See [XML 1.0 Section 2.8 "Prolog and Document Type Declaration"](https://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#sec-prolog-dtd), which says "The document type declaration MUST appear before the first [element](https://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#dt-element) in the document.") In general, I think it will be helpful to explain in more natural language that: - SVG does not need to be valid XML. (Since SVG is defined in terms of XML, readers could reasonably expect that valid XML is required) - A DOCTYPE declaration is not necessary nor recommended. (This was removed in https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/commit/96e51895fb4438ec3bea0965c90afc668aaed01c for some reason.) Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/960 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 2 January 2025 09:45:41 UTC