Re: SVG12: microsyntaces

On 20/05/2005, at 6:33 PM, Dean Jackson wrote:

> On Mon 18 Apr 2005, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
>
>> Dear Scalable Vector Graphics Working Group,
>>
>>   http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-SVGMobile12-20050413/ has an  
>> incredible
>> number of problems regarding the definition of various value  
>> types, many
>> times the definition of non-terminals in the specification is  
>> entirely
>> absent, incomplete, misleading or even incorrect. There problems  
>> are too
>> numerous to list them individually which makes checking the schema  
>> for
>> correctness and completeness, writing a validator or even  
>> implementing
>> requirements for processing illegal values very difficult. Please  
>> change
>> the draft as follows:
>>
>>   * Each reference to a non-terminal is  a link to its normative
>>     definition
>>
>
> Agreed.

After further examination the Working Group decided not to
do this at the moment. While it would be indeed useful, it's
an unnecessary burden on the specification editors. We'll
investigate it again in future drafts.

>>   * Legal property values are defined using the syntax defined in CSS
>>     2.1, http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/about#q7
>>
>
> Agreed.

We've examined all the property definitions and made modifications
where needed to be compatible with the CSS syntax.

>>   * The number of grammar formats is reduced to the necessary extend,
>>     e.g. paths are defined using some BNF format while syntax of
>>     animation element attributes is defined using some EBNF format,
>>     these should use the same format
>>
>
> Agreed.

We have made it clear that our grammars use EBNF.

>>   * The normative definition for all such grammar formats is clearly
>>     defined and normatively referenced
>>
>
> Agreed - we think EBNF works.

We've added a normative reference to the EBNF specification.

Dean

Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2005 14:53:35 UTC