- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:51:14 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
Ian Hickson wrote: > On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Robin Berjon wrote: >>>Because otherwise, as I wrote in the comment, content will be handled >>>inconsistenctly based on whether the UA supports the MIME type >>>directly or just via RFC3023 support. (As seen, for example, with the >>>W3C validator.) >> >>So, enforcing a broken behaviour upon SVG to be consistent with systems >>that don't support SVG is a good idea? :) > > Enforcing interoperability is a good idea. Except that that isn't interoperability, it's bug for bug comformance which is different. I'd take a working tool over two broken ones any day. If you disagree, take it to the TAG because we're sure sticking to their recommendation: http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/Overview.html#xml-media-types > The issue of whether allowing > encoding information to be included in the metadata channel instead of in > the markup itself is a good idea or not is irrelevant; that ship sailed > years ago, with the publication of RFC3023. Well a new ship's up with the updated RFC 3023 that deals with all the previous bugs. > What matters at this juncture > is making sure that implementations of SVG and XML processors in general > parse SVG documents in the same way. And the best way to achieve that is to not use charset parameters. -- Robin Berjon
Received on Tuesday, 23 November 2004 13:51:25 UTC