W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: SVG 1.1 2nd Edition Test Suite using svgweb (locally)

From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 23:48:25 -0400
Message-ID: <4C6A0689.8070105@w3.org>
To: Patrick Dengler <patd@microsoft.com>
CC: "public-svg-wg@w3.org" <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
Hi, Folks-

Patrick Dengler wrote (on 8/16/10 8:50 PM):
> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlSVGWeb_local/index.html
> Why is it that the SVG Test Suite has the following:
> <!--[if IE]>
> <object src="../../svg/animate-dom-01-f.svg" width="480" height="360"
> classid="image/svg+xml"><p style="font-size:300%;color:red">FAIL</p>
> <![endif]-->
> <!--[if !IE]>-->
> <object data="../../svg/animate-dom-01-f.svg" width="480" height="360"
> type="image/svg+xml"><p style="font-size:300%;color:red">FAIL</p>
> <!--<![endif]-->

That's the special branch for SVGWeb, which needs special consideration. 
  For most purposes, everyone should be looking at one of the non-SVGWeb 
forks [1].

> We don’t believe that classid="image/svg+xml" is valid syntax, nor do we
> think this is being vendor agnostic.

I'm not so sure that it's invalid syntax [2], though it is certainly a 
hack.  To be fair, this is targeted at versions of IE that don't have 
SVG support, so I don't think it's unreasonable.

However, since SVGWeb also works with Firefox, Chrome, and Safari (in 
order to provide a consistent experience cross-browser), I see no reason 
we should specifically single out IE.  Maybe whoever put the harness 
together could speak to that?

[1] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/objects.html#adef-classid

-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2010 03:48:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:20:12 UTC