- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 04:13:21 +0200
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
* Sylvain Galineau wrote: >This is from a previous version of the spec though. Where is the >equivalent in the current draft ? None of the SVG Recommendations modify the text/css media type in a way that makes using scientific notation conforming in such resources. As I understand it http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-SVG11-20100622/ is the latest relevant draft, but that to me is a proposal and has no influence on the question whether scientific notation was ever allowed in text/css style sheets. >I am trying to figure out whether SVG explicitly or implicitly allows the >e notation in stylesheets or in the style attribute. Thus far it seems >that's not the case, at the cost of obvious discontinuities for authors, >tools and UAs alike since attribute values support it. As far as text/css resources go, which indirectly includes the style attribute in SVG documents, this has never been defined as conforming in a W3C Recommendation (as noted, presentation attributes, the DOM and SMIL complicate matters a bit, but as far as writing something like "opacity: 1e0" is concerned, that has never been allowed). -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2010 02:13:59 UTC