W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > March 2009

Re: Element Whitelisting

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:46:56 +0100
Message-ID: <49C90070.3010107@opera.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
CC: public-html@w3.org, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Doug Schepers wrote:
> Hi, James-
> James Graham wrote (on 3/24/09 10:37 AM):
>> Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>> If we want the list to be more malleable than the rest of the
>>> algorithm definition document, the algorithm spec should have a link
>>> to a URI which will dereference to the latest list at any given point
>>> in time. A great bonus would be if the document at the URI came with
>>> revision history.
>> That sounds acceptable to me from the point of view of implementing this
>> in html5lib. (For comparison, it would not be acceptable if I was
>> expected to reconstruct the list myself from some version of the SVG 
>> spec).
> Just curious... given that SVG already has those lists as Appendices, as 
> I mentioned to Henri, is that still a burden?  It's trivial for the SVG 
> WG to maintain such a definitive list, and we're willing to do so, but 
> I'm wondering about the nature of your concern.

Yes, I would prefer a specific list that covers this case. That makes it 
much easier for implementors to be sure that they are doing the right 
thing rather than having to extract some entries from a longer table. 
(It also makes sense from a spec hygiene pov for this list to have the 
same status as the rest of the parsing algorithm rather than being 
non-normative because it is kept in an appendix).
Received on Tuesday, 24 March 2009 15:47:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:22 UTC