- From: Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:49:58 +0000
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, "liam@w3.org" <liam@w3.org>, W3C CSS Mailing List <www-style@w3.org>
Ahh I see. I think it's fair to say that only formats that have an implementations in a user agent should be in the list, but it doesn't need to be exhaustive. I'm not an expert on print-oriented user agents like Prince, but from a quick search it doesn't look like any support EPS, soooooo meh to it. On 20 February 2013 17:24, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On 20 February 2013 04:37, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I think EPS is old-school so shouldn't be included. (PDF is much better) >> > The fact that it is executable code (Postscript is a programming >> > language >> > after all) should be enough to not include it as a supported format. >> > >> >> This isn't a list of formats the browser must support, it's a list of >> formats the browser must indicate their level of support for. > > > I understand that. I'm saying that EPS should not be on the list because no > browser will ever support it.
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2013 20:50:30 UTC