- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:10:09 +1100
- To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Hello WG.
Andi Sidwell pointed out to me off list that one of the summarised
points I made about the commented-out proposal in HTML 5 is incorrect.
(I misread the spec, it seems.)
Cameron McCormack:
> Parsing this document:
>
> <!DOCTYPE html>
> <html>
> <head>
> <title></title>
> </head>
> <body>
> <svg>
> <circle r='100'/>
> </svg>
> </body>
> </html>
>
> would be non-conforming, since the <svg> tag is missing an
> xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' attribute. That element would,
> however, be an {http://www.w3.org/2000/svg}svg element.
In fact, the above would conforming. The requirement is that if an
xmlns attribute is present, then it must hold the correct namespace URI
for the element (i.e., "http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" for <svg>).
Omitting the xmlns="" attribute is conforming, and still results in the
element being placed in the SVG namespace.
This behaviour then is consistent with how xmlns:xlink="" is handled.
--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2009 23:10:55 UTC