- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 00:06:30 +1000
- To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Hello WG! I’m wondering whether certain references in SVG 1.1 Second Edition should be updated to the latest corresponding spec. The following are informative references to non-latest version specs that I think we could bump up without harm, especially the ones which weren’t RECs at the time: Charmod 1.0 WD 30 Apr 2002 to 1.0 “Fundamentals”, REC 15 Feb 2005 MathML 2.0 REC 21 Feb 2001 to 2.0 Second Edition, REC 21 Oct 2003 RDF Syntax REC 22 Feb 1999 to RDF Primer, REC 10 Feb 2004 RDFS CR 27 Mar 2000 to REC 10 Feb 2004 XHTML 1.0 REC 26 Jan 2000 to Second Edition, REC 1 August 2002 There are mentions in the spec of how you should follow WCAG, and how you can use XSLT. We could add references to WCAG2 and XSLT2 here, just as we did in 1.2T. Again, these are informative, so it would just be if we want to acknowledge the newer specs. Now, for the normative references. These are the ones that have newer versions: DOM 2 Core REC 13 Nov 2000 to DOM 3 Core, REC 7 Apr 2004 I don’t think we should do this one. PNG REC 1 Oct 1996 to Second Edition, REC 10 Nov 2003 Errata and clarifications. 1.2T references this. URI RFC 2396 Aug 1998 to RFC 3986, Jan 2005 Incorporates RFC 2372 (IPv6 literals), which 1.1 already references separately. Various bug fixes and clarifications. 1.2T references this. Language Tags RFC 3066 Jan 2001 to BCP 47 (RFC 4646 & 4647), Sep 2006 Allows more flexible language tags, like zh-TW-Hant. Defines language tag matching. 1.2T references this. UTF-8 RFC 2279 Jan 1998 to RFC 3629, Nov 2003 Stricter on allowing only code points 0000-10FFFF to be encoded. Stricter on decoding invalid UTF-8. 1.2T references this. UNICODE 3.2 2000 to 5.1, 2007 The only practical difference would be changes to the Unicode bidi algorithm (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr9/#Modifications). 1.2T references Unicode 4.1. XML 1.0 Second Edition REC 6 Oct 2000 to Fifth Edition, REC 26 Nov 2008 Forwards-compatible handling of XML 1.1 documents (which nobody uses anyway), allowing more characters in XML names, various clarifications. 1.2T references the Fourth Edition. XML Base REC 27 June 2001 to Second Edition, REC 28 Jan 2009 Clarifications. 1.2T references the First Edition. Namespaces in XML REC 14 Jan 1999 to Second Edition, 17 Aug 2006 Clarifications and bug fixes. 1.2T references this. XSL 1.0 REC 15 Oct 2001 to 1.1, REC 6 Dec 2006 The only thing SVG 1.1 depends normatively on XSL for is the definition of font baselines in the Text chapter. That text hasn’t changed from XSL 1.0 to 1.1, so there’d be no practical change from updating the reference. 1.2T references this. Other W3C specifications take the opportunity of a subsequent edition to bump references like these, so I think we should if there’s no downside. BTW I don’t think we should add a reference to XML 1.1. :-) Thanks, Cameron -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Friday, 1 May 2009 14:07:20 UTC