- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:21:00 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Antoine Quint <ml@graougraou.com>
On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Antoine Quint wrote: > On 12 juin 04, at 21:40, Ian Hickson wrote: >> >> Is the following SVG fragment technically in error? If so, where does >> the SVG specification say so? If not, what should happen? >> >> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" >> xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> >> <rect x="10" y="10" height="100" width="100" fill="blue" >> xlink:href="data:,test" xlink:type="simple"/> >> </svg> > > It is invalid if you want to validate it against the SVG 1.1 DTD, since > none of the XLink attributes are allowed on the <rect> element: [...] Yes but is it technically in error? I couldn't find anything in the SVG spec that said that an invalid document was in error. F.2 only refers to unknown elements and attributes not in the SVG DTD, and explicitly _allows_ attributes from other namespaces. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 12 June 2004 17:21:29 UTC