- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 08:22:55 -0400
- To: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>
- CC: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Dana Lee Ling <dleeling@comfsm.fm>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Jeff Schiller wrote: > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 4:47 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: >> As someone who routinely hand authors XHTML + SVG (and have done so for >> years), it disappoints me that this discussion so far has focused on the >> easily correctable issues. Ones that can be corrected in seconds by the use >> of the following web service: >> >> http://services.philip.html5.org/html-to-xhtml/ > > Well as another hand-author, I, for one, was not aware that service > existed until 4 days ago as part of this discussion. Therefore I am > not at all disappointed. In fact, quite the opposite. OK, so that was a good outcome. I remain disappointed that we have not moved on from that point. I actually thought that we had rough consensus that user agents (in particular browsers) which encounter inline SVG in content served as text/html is to treat the following as identical: <svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'><circle r='20'/></svg> <svg><circle r=20></svg> Anybody want to put forward a concrete proposal as to what the DOM produced should look like in the second case? > Jeff - Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 30 March 2009 12:23:52 UTC