- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:01:07 +0100
- To: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Jan 11, 2006, at 15:44, Jim Ley wrote: > "Robin Berjon" <robin.berjon@expway.fr> wrote in message > news:3670757E-C2F0-44E4-A776-047C4C8B090C@expway.fr... >> Incidentally, the TAG's work on versioning concurs that the >> MustIgnore >> strategy in vocabulary design is sound. It's also in line with >> strategies >> adopted by other WGs for their vocabularies. > > but not by implementations, most of which attempt to error correct > and not > ignore, since that behaviour is much better for users, why does the > WG feel > it necessary to prevent this from happening? Sorry Jim but I'm not sure what you mean by "error-correct". If you mean loosening error conditions (eg accepting white space) then I agree, but it's a different issue from how actually errors need to be handled. -- Robin Berjon Senior Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2006 15:01:01 UTC