- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:42:16 -0800
- To: Jon Ferraiolo <jonf@adobe.com>
- Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-svg@w3.org
On Jan 10, 2006, at 4:08 PM, Jon Ferraiolo wrote: > > Bjoern, > The statement unfair and inaccurate to say " The Working Group > rejected the idea" when in our response (http://lists.w3.org/ > Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Apr/0156 ) to your "Microsyntaces" > email we basically agreed with 3 of your 4 points, and we have now > in the latest Last Call draft put in changes which at least > partially addresses your fourth point via fixes to some of syntax > definitions for SVG's properties, such as including the definition > of color inline within the SVG spec. > > Regarding the lack of interoperability for the following content: > > height="100 user units or so" > > I am over on the Jim Ley side of the argument about error handling. > Don't put the burden on each implementation to have to validate > each attribute value and don't slow down processing to perform this > validation. Validating attribute values while parsing is not a huge burden. This is already done for CSS, and for HTML presentational attributes. I can say with some confidence that it adds very little to the overall parsing cost, having spent a lot of time optimizing WebKit page load speed. Interoperability is more important here -- we have a demonstration that UA behavior varies. The spec clearly should specify what happens with malformed attributes (which may already be true in the 1.2 tiny spec for all I know, perhaps the document is "in error" and so should give a fatal error display). Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2006 00:42:23 UTC