- From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:02:01 +0200
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <AANLkTimzQ1R6gkQWhMogKqn0M_UWRcqRezpk11shE9Fd@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote: > On Tuesday, June 29, 2010, 1:40:07 PM, Innovimax wrote: > > IS> Dear all, > > IS> Here are few comments > > Thanks for the comments, Mohamed. These are being tracked under ISSUE-2344 > and I have ACTION-2821 to update the spec in response to your comment. > Perfect > > IS> * ECMAScript is now at 5th Edition of December 2009 > > It is. I'm just checking which edition of ECMAScript is in fact > implemented by current implementations before updating that reference. There > is a concern regarding language changes so we want to be sure to reference > the correct edition here. > Fair enough > > IS> * The latest ICC.1 spec is ICC.1:2004-10 (Version 4.2.0.0) > Yes. > > IS> * The latest version of ISO8601 is 2004 > IS> http://www.iso.org/iso/fr/catalogue_detail?csnumber=40874 > > OK > > IS> * JPEG the reference has now been updated to ISO/IEC 10918-1:1994/Cor > 1:2005 > IS> * SRGB has been updated to IEC 61966-2-1/Amd 1:2003 > > Thanks for pointers to the latest JPEG and sRGB specs. > > IS> * Unicode 5.2.0 has been released > > Yes. As XML 5th edition specifically links to the 'latest' version of > Unicode and since the I18n Core WG refer to it also in their discussions of > bidi it seems clear we should reference the latest one, too. > > > IS> * XMLBase : The link is good but the test should say that it's the > IS> Second Edition > > Agreed. > > IS> * XML-NS should point to the third Edition > > Indeed. > > IS> * XLINK should be updated to XLINK 1.1 which is now a REC and remove > IS> XLINK 1.1 from informative reference > > Yes, good catch. In fact most existing SVG 1.1 content is more conformant > to XLink 1.1 than to 1.0 (omits xlink:type="simple" in the instance). > > Even better !! > IS> * XPointer is at the status of Working draft and should not be in the > IS> normative reference > > Its also not referred to anywhere from the rest of the spec, so this > reference has been deleted. > > IS> * NVDL has been updated to ISO/IEC 19757-4:2006/Cor 1:2008 > > OK > > IS> * OpenType has been updated to 1.6 > > We would like to check on implementation status before updating that one. > Fair enough > > IS> * SMIL1 has been outdated by SMIL3 > > Yes. > > IS> Please add a link to Relax NG version of SVG 1.1 > > If one existed, we would happily link to it. A good RNG I mean, not some > namespace-less travesty auto-generated from the DTD :) but we do not have > one as yet. > > Do you happen to have one? > I just forwarded the question to ISO SC 34 people with my W3C Liaison hat > If not, we plan to create one in due course, but it won't be under /TR and > will be a separate publication. We would probably start with the SVG 1.2T > RNG, removing 1.2-specific elements and adding the elements and attributes > that are in 1.1 but not in 1.2T. > That sounds like a reasonnable plan B Thanks Mohamed -- Innovimax SARL Consulting, Training & XML Development 9, impasse des Orteaux 75020 Paris Tel : +33 9 52 475787 Fax : +33 1 4356 1746 http://www.innovimax.fr RCS Paris 488.018.631 SARL au capital de 10.000 €
Received on Monday, 12 July 2010 15:02:31 UTC