- From: Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@enst.fr>
- Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:31:21 +0200
- To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- CC: www-svg@w3.org
Hi Olaf, Le 27/04/2010 11:31, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann a écrit : > Therefore I think, it is not a question of transition of documents > from one viewer to another. It is a question of testing, reporting > and fixing bugs and gaps in all viewers. In some cases the document > can be simplified with some workarounds to get a proper presentation > in several viewers, but only by following results from systematic tests. I don't know exactly the full extent of your tests, it's been a long time since I checked them. I guess that many of the differences between viewers exist probably because they concern very specific features of the spec, maybe sometimes pathological cases. Viewer implementors are probably not fixing them because it's not worth the effort. They often ask the question of how many users will benefit from this bug fix. From this point of view, I'm not sure that the best choice is to incite them to test, debug and fix their viewers. Another option could be to simplify the spec, deprecate the parts that are not interoperably implemented and discourage authors to use them. Cyril -- Cyril Concolato Maître de Conférences/Associate Professor Groupe Mutimedia/Multimedia Group Telecom ParisTech 46 rue Barrault 75 013 Paris, France http://concolato.blog.telecom-paristech.fr/
Received on Thursday, 29 April 2010 11:31:44 UTC