- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 14:25:09 +0200
- To: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>
- CC: "Erik Dahlstrom" <ed@opera.com>, public-svg-wg@w3.org
On Friday, May 21, 2010, 10:52:55 AM, Alex wrote: AD> Hi Erik, >>> The BNF in the main part of the spec mandates the '0' or '1' for the >>> flag. >>> So, the Elliptic Arc implementation notes need to be corrected. >>Hmm, I don't see the harm in keeping that wording since it's independent >>of how the arc segment was generated. AD> Well it's superfluous then. It implies that a non-zero value apart from 1 AD> is possible - and that's what older implementations probably handled OK. AD> So it only serves to confuse authors and implementers. AD> I'd be inclined to remove it. It doesn't add anything to the spec. if the only possible AD> value is 0 or 1. I think we are mixing up the conformance for generators/content and for readers/viewers. Content should have 0 or 1 as the values of the fA and fS flags Viewers must treat non-zero values as meaning the same as 1 (and can presumably normalise to 1, if someone types 5567823 there is no need to store that value). I agree that the spec could be clearer here and that the test is incorrect on this subtest. I also don't see any errata that relate to this test. As its at the end of the table of errata tests, that means it was added later on. I don't find a mention in minutes about that though. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Technical Director, Interaction Domain W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Friday, 21 May 2010 12:25:15 UTC