[rfc-i] SVG controls and HTML

Doug Royer douglasroyer at gmail.com
Tue Mar 8 12:28:13 PST 2016


On 03/06/2016 02:42 PM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote:
> Hello Doug,
> 
> Do you feel your comments were adequately addressed in the third
> revision of the draft, draft-iab-svg-rfc-02?
> 
> Thanks,
> Heather
> 

YES ! And more importantly I think the first time reader will understand
which SVG sub-set to use.

The latest draft and the answers on this mailing list definitely helped.

Section 2.1 is still not accurate when compared to the Appendix A. I
assume that section is still incomplete?

In section 2.  SVG 1.2 RFC: An SVG profile for RFCs

A typo ... and issue

  ... Appendix A (below) provides a complete RELAX NG Compact
  (rnc) schema for SVG 1.2 RFC.  It is derived from the SVG 1.2
  schema, and is the formal definition of SVG 1.2 RFC.  The remainder
  of this section gives a simplified - i.e. easier to read
  and >>> dunderstand <<< [TYPO - understand?]- overview of SVG 1.2
  RFC. ...


I do understand what the text is saying. But if I were to tell someone
to read the draft, I would tell them to skip all of 2.1 except the first
sentence. Its irrelevant because its accurate or incomplete.

I have not done an exhaustive comparison to SVG 1.2 (non-RFC). Perhaps
this section should concentrate on those elements and properties that
are different from SVG 1.2 (non-RFC)?

I am just one voice. So maybe its just how I read things?



-- 

Doug Royer - (http://DougRoyer.US)
DouglasRoyer at gmail.com
714-989-6135

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4251 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20160308/6868b596/attachment.p7s>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list