Re: Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) Tiny 1.2 Specification should link to CSS2.1 CR

Hi Doug,

Thanks for this quick reply

I'm fine with the reply on the fact that there is no hard dependency on CSS
2 only features

But it would be better if there is a warning in two ways :
1) that CSS 2 is not maintained any more
2) that CSS 2.1 will replace CSS 2 as soon as it becomes a REC

Regards,

Mohamed



On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi, Mohamed-
>
> Innovimax SARL wrote (on 11/3/08 3:07 AM):
> >
> > My concern is more or less that "to be released" CSS 2.1
> > implementations, would have trouble to keep in sync with SVG Tiny 1.2
> > implementations since SVG is relying on CSS 2 (which has substantial
> > difference with 2.1).
> >
> > Probably a good thing is to identify dependency on "CSS 2 only" behavior
> > and to provide a evolution plan to CSS 2.1 and CSS 3 features for future
> > release of SVG specs
>
> Having reviewed the SVG and CSS specs, the SVG WG doesn't believe there
> are any significant differences in the parts of CSS 2 and CSS 2.1 that
> we depend upon, so a normative reference to CSS 2 should not constrain
> any CSS 2.1 implementation.  So, it's not that we have a dependency on
> CSS 2 vs. CSS 2.1, but rather that we don't have a strict dependency on
> either one.  Since the Process Document does not allow normative
> dependencies on specs less advanced along the Rec track, we have no
> choice but to reference CSS 2 until CSS 2.1 is more mature.
>
> Going forward, the SVG WG does intend to align with CSS 2.1 and CSS 3
> instead, so we don't anticipate any conflicts there as well.
>
> I hope that this satisfies your comment.  Please let us know immediately
> in either case, as we intend to make our transition call tomorrow.
>
> Regards-
> -Doug
>



-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €