[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: WG's responding to XML-DEV (was Re: What is wrong with SVG?)

• From: Peter Murray-Rust <peter@u...>
• To: "'XML-DEV \(E-mail\)'" <xml-dev@x...>
• Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 15:46:17 +0000

At 23:21 05/03/00 -0500, Michael Champion wrote:
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Peter Murray-Rust" <peter@u...>
>To: "'XML-DEV (E-mail)'" <xml-dev@x...>
>Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2000 6:23 PM
>Subject: RE: What is wrong with SVG?
>
>
>>
>> In the present case there is probably no real point in discussing the
>> details of SVG *on XML-DEV*. WGs will not normally take notice, unless
>> there is so much clamour in the commons that it seems politic. There may
>be
>> a point in discussing some issues that are generic or cross more than one
>> spec. So if a number of W3C specs had attribute values or content that
>> require microparsing it could be useful to raise it here. It is unlikely
>> that there would be a direct response.
>
[... useful argument snipped ...]

>I don't follow SVG closely, but I would encourage people to debate the
>"subelements vs microparsing" issue publicly, marshall whatever evidence can
>be obtained on each side, and make SURE that the WG responds if it appears
>that they are on the wrong track here.  SVG is far too critical to the Web
>to allow it to be suboptimal.  Likewise if the inefficiency of the DOM is
>part of the problem here, that should be addressed  (perhaps with a hybrid
>push/pull model or a "flyweight" mini-Node), not force  people to kludge

>around it. The only practical way to figure out whether the SVG and/or DOM
>specs need to be improved is for *lots* of people to analyze and critique
>them, and the XML-DEV subscribers are probably the only semi-organized group
>in the world qualified to do so.

I have also had a private mail suggesting that discussion of this aspect
would be valuable and so my initial posting should not be seen as too
"directional". Let XML-DEV - not me - take this discussion where it wants
to go. One aspect might be how we track the informal traffic between
XML-DEV and the WGs - at present we mainly guess and talk at those meetings
we happen to be able to attend.

	P.

>
>
>
>***************************************************************************
>This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
>To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
>List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>***************************************************************************
> 

***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************

• References:
  • Re: What is wrong with SVG?
    • From: Peter Murray-Rust <peter@u...>
  • RE: What is wrong with SVG?
    • From: Peter Murray-Rust <peter@u...>
  • WG's responding to XML-DEV (was Re: What is wrong with SVG?)
    • From: "Michael Champion" <mike.champion@s...>

• Prev by Date: raw names vs qualified names
• Next by Date: SAX2: NOTATION attribute decls
• Previous by thread: WG's responding to XML-DEV (was Re: What is wrong with SVG?)
• Next by thread: Attribute-happy "XML"
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread