- From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 18:49:56 +0900
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Hello,
From the SVGMobile spec, I can't figure out what the PI for SVG 1.1
Tiny and Basic are.
in http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/#sec-svgtdtd
[[
This DTD is identified by the PUBLIC and SYSTEM identifiers:
PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1 Tiny//EN"
SYSTEM "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11-tiny.dtd"
<!ENTITY % SVG.version "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1 Tiny//EN" >
]]
in http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/#sec-conformance
[[
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG Tiny 1.1//EN"
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11-tiny.dtd>
]]
ditto for SVG Basic
in http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/#sec-conformance F.2
[[
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG Basic 1.1//EN"
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11-basic.dtd>
]]
in http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/#sec-svgbdtd
[[
This DTD is identified by the PUBLIC and SYSTEM identifiers:
PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1 Basic//EN"
SYSTEM "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11-basic.dtd"
-->
<!ENTITY % SVG.version "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1 Basic//EN" >
]]
So, which is it? :)
1.1 Basic or Basic 1.1? 1.1 Tiny or Tiny 1.1?
The problem is, I've seen both in the wild, in the (few) doctype-
toting SVG mobile docs I could find.
For now I will assume that the correct one is the one in the
conformance section.
The spec may have to be amended to allow both, but that's not a
fantastic solution...
And if this is a mistake, I suppose it should be in the errata.
Thanks!
olivier
--
olivier Thereaux - W3C - http://www.w3.org/People/olivier/
W3C Open Source Software: http://www.w3.org/Status
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 09:50:06 UTC