- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:13:09 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Doug Schepers wrote: > > | This point is debatable, since the lack of clear testable, > | implementable conformance criteria make it hard to actually > | test for interoperability. > | It has been my experience that SVG implementors do not even > | actually agree on what the correct processing model is, let > | alone that what has been implemented is interoperable. > > Could you elaborate on that? It seems to me that most of the > implementations I've seen are fairly in line with one another. When I did some testing of SVG a few months ago (in preparation for Opera's SVG release, and in relation to Mozilla's SVG work as well), I found many tests where I couldn't find a single correct implementation. When speaking to implementors about this, they all "explained" what the SVG spec meant in contradictory ways. (I stopped trying to make tests when I found that the spec itself was so vague that making tests was nigh on impossible, and instead started sending last call comments to get these issues resolved. These are now being rejected. Go figure.) -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2005 21:13:19 UTC