- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:02:16 -0400
- To: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- CC: www-svg@w3.org
Hi, Mohamed- Innovimax SARL wrote (on 9/17/08 1:02 PM): > > Instead of linking to CSS2 REC, you should link to CSS2.1 CR (which > hopefully by the time will become a REC) Thanks for you comment. We will consider this request. I have 2 follow-up questions that will affect our decision: 1) What functionality in CSS2.1, which has changed since CSS2, will affect the way in which SVG refers to CSS? 2) Do you have a hard date for CSS2.1's Rec status? Because this is a normative dependency, the SVG WG is reluctant to change this reference unless absolutely necessary. We would need to review the CSS2.1 spec to make sure that we don't introduce unintentional incompatibilities; we wrote and implemented SVG 1.2 Tiny with CSS2 in mind. We also don't think it's responsible to reference unstable documents normatively, since schedules can slip. Should CSS2.1 become a Recommendation before the end of our Last Call period, we will reexamine the implications of changing the reference. However, for future specifications, we will definitely reference CSS2.1 where it makes sense. Regards- -Doug, on behalf of the SVG WG
Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2008 22:02:51 UTC