Re: Assumption in the SVG specifications

On Aug 31, 2006, at 16:11, Dave Singer wrote:
> So, SVGB 1.1 allowed use of <image> for SVG images (one presumes un- 
> animated), but this permission is orphaned in 1.2, where this is  
> NOT permitted.

Well to be fair B is considered to be more or less a dead branch.

> What fun we have!

You can see why there was disagreement :)

-- 
Robin Berjon
    Senior Research Scientist
    Expway, http://expway.com/

Received on Thursday, 31 August 2006 14:31:45 UTC