- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 20:54:44 -0500
- CC: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, "public-svg-wg@w3.org" <public-svg-wg@w3.org>, Niklas Hagelroth <niklas.hagelroth@ikivo.com>
Hi, Niklas- How does Ikivo feel about this? I would prefer to drop the "trailing semicolon" syntax, since it may cause us problems in the future. We could keep a note in the spec that this is a known issue and that authors and authoring tools should avoid it, though some viewers accept it. Thanks- -Doug Lee Martineau wrote (on 11/3/08 8:14 AM): > Hi Cameron, > > Having trailing semicolons as non-conformant is acceptable. > > -- > Lee > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Cameron McCormack [mailto:cam@mcc.id.au] >> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 6:37 PM >> To: niklas.hagelroth@ikivo.com; Lee Martineau >> Cc: schepers@w3.org; public-svg-wg@w3.org >> Subject: Trailing semicolon in animation @values attribute >> >> Hi Niklas and Lee. >> >> In response to Olaf’s complaint[1] about allowing the trailing semicolon >> in the @values attribute on animation elements, we were wondering if >> this was necessary, or if we could revert that addition to leave such >> content being non-conformant, especially given Ikivo has said they would >> fix this in future versions of their authoring tool (IIRC). Allowing >> the trailing semicolon does, as Olaf mentions, conflict with SMIL & >> other implementations and is inconsistent with other semicolon-separated >> lists specified in animation attributes. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Cameron >> >> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Oct/0201.html >> >> -- >> Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2008 01:54:54 UTC