- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:11:11 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>, www-svg@w3.org
On Tuesday, November 23, 2004, 2:19:57 PM, Ian wrote: IH> 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? :) IH> Enforcing interoperability is a good idea. The issue of whether allowing IH> encoding information to be included in the metadata channel instead of in IH> the markup itself is a good idea or not is irrelevant; that ship sailed IH> years ago, with the publication of RFC3023. Which was then marked as architecturally bad, in the Architecture of the World Wide Web document; and RFC 3023 is not being revised. IH> What matters at this juncture IH> is making sure that implementations of SVG and XML processors in general IH> parse SVG documents in the same way. Which they do, as long as they do not make up parameters that don't exist. However, since you like making tests Ian, perhaps you could set up a test where the XML is in encoding a, the xml encoding declaration says its encoding b, the charset says its encoding a, and see how many XML processors will update the xml encoding declaration so that the instance is well formed locally when saved to disk. I would be very interested to see results of such a test. Note that such a test instance would be non well formed when processed server side. Since XML server side processing happens rather a lot, this would be a bad idea. This is why the TAG says that duplicate metadata is a bad thing, and says that the encoding should not be specified if the document already specifies it. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Tuesday, 23 November 2004 14:11:12 UTC