- From: <thomas.deweese@kodak.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:30:37 -0500
- To: jim@jibbering.com
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org, www-svg-request@w3.org
Hi Jim, www-svg-request@w3.org wrote on 01/11/2006 09:03:25 AM: > <thomas.deweese@kodak.com> wrote: > > I personally can't believe the WG has made this change. It means that > > no compliant renderer can inform users that they have made a mistake > > because of course they haven't they have simply indicated to the UA to > > ignore the value of the attribute. > > > > Well, if we didn't have 'tag soup' before it will now quickly > > proliferate. > > This is what you get if you mandate a particular form of error processing, > the processing is then indistinguishable from real processing for authors. Yes, and no. The SVG 1.1 mandatory error processing included: A highly perceivable indication of error shall occur. So if the author _wanted_ say a dialog box to pop up indicating that a particular line of the file was in error then they could (in theory anyway) count on that happening. In practice I don't think any author would desire that behavior. So I don't think it's right to suggest that all mandatory error processing is equivalent. > If it's an error, it should be up to the UA what to do with it, there is no > need for interoperability of invalid content, indeed lack of interoperability is > possibly a good thing. I don't necessarily disagree with this statement. My real issue is with mandated error handling that requires errors to be ignored - implementations are now forcibly barred from raising a content issue. If the WG wanted to loosen the error detecting & response requirements I wouldn't mind, but instead they have kept essentially the exact same error detection requirement (width="100 " still needs to be recognized as an 'unsupported value') it's just that they have rewritten the way user agents must respond in a fundamentally different way (width="100 " now _must_ disable rendering of the element, instead of throwing the whole document into error).
Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2006 14:30:42 UTC