- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 22:28:38 +1100
- To: SVG Working Group WG <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: chris@w3.org
Hello Chris and the rest of the WG. SVG Working Group Issue Tracker: > ISSUE-2088 (no-color-interpolation): Painting chapter mentions > optional color interpolation space, which is not described anywhere > [SVG Tiny 1.2] > > http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2088 > > Raised by: Cameron McCormack > On product: SVG Tiny 1.2 > > (noted by JonCruz in #svg) > > The very last sentence of the Painting chapter says: > > Optionally other color profiles may be provided to specify an alternative > interpolation color space. > > but nowhere is it defined how this optional feature works. It should > probably be removed. (Note that I raised this issue on behalf of JonCruz and while I just raised it as a normal issue on the spec, perhaps it should be treated as a LC comment.) We came up with a suggested rewording of this sentence during the telcon, to clarify that it is not a feature defined by SVG Tiny 1.2 and that 1.2T doesn’t define the way this is done: Other W3C specifications may provide a means for color profiles to be provided in order to specify an alternative interpolation color space. Chris, is this rewording OK? (Suggestions welcome for a synonym for “provided” there, too.) Thanks, Cameron -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2008 11:29:29 UTC