On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 08:22:34 -0500, Thomas DeWeese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think however ambiguous text is and how attractive it is to > leverage common sense you really can't argue with a DTD that says: > > <!ATTLIST %SVG.script.qname; [...] > type %ContentType.datatype; #REQUIRED > > > This says that every script element _must_ have a 'type' attribute > or the document is not valid according to the SVG DTD. Also, the spec > almost always talks about what the default value is for attributes > that can be omitted. It does not do this for the type attribute at > all. It is probably worth raising this as an issue with the SVG-WG, > but given the DTD decl I don't think there is much chance that the > resolution will be that 'type' is not required. But at least they > can remove any ambiguity on this issue.
Well, given http://www.mozilla.org/projects/svg/faq.html#script I hope it isn't required - see the link in that FAQ answer and note that Robin is an SVG-WG member. Jonathan ----- To unsubscribe send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -or- visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers and click "edit my membership" ---- Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
