W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-cvs@w3.org > October 2011

[Bug 13311] SVG foreignObject error reporting broken

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:05:27 +0000
To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1RIxYF-00025x-Up@jessica.w3.org>

Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #3 from Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> 2011-10-26 07:05:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> please provide evidence for your assertion,

Run it through the SVG validator like I suggested:


You will get this error:

 Line 222, Column 62: document type does not allow element "foreignObject"
here; assuming missing "switch" start-tag

I did not write that validator. It is a completely separate application from
the validator.nu backend. And as far as I understand it, it's using a DTD
provided by the SVG working group.

Also, examine that SVG 1.1 relaxng schema provided by the SVG working group. It
enforces that same constraint. That is the schema which the validator.nu
backend uses. We have not invented or added any additional constraint about
this to it in the copy we use for the validator.nu backend.

> reading the SVG 1.1 spec says:
> 'Usually, a ‘foreignObject’ will be used in conjunction with the ‘switch’
> element...'
> http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/extend.html#EmbeddingForeignObjects
> usually does not imply 'must'

I tried to read the spec myself and gave up because it's not written in a way
that makes it possible to clearly identify document-conformance requirements.
So if you want to get clarification on it, I guess you'll need to contact the
SVG working group and ask them.

> if you still believe this bug ill-conceived,

I never said it was "ill conceived". There's just nothing here that is within
my power to change. If any change needs to be made here, it needs to be done by
the SVG working group.

> please provide a URL that
> substantiates your suggestion,

I've pointed you to the output from the SVG validator and explained that for
the validator.nu backend, we are simply using a relaxng schema provided by the
SVG working group. If you think there's a problem with the schema or with the
SVG validator behavior, then you need to take it up with the SVG working group

> I shall review and take to working group as required.

I have nothing more for you to review than what I've already pointed you do. I
suggest you go ahead and  take it up now with the SVG working group if you want
to pursue it further.

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 07:05:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:02:51 UTC