Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Basica SVG Template?

Expand Messages
  • Marjorie Roswell
    Would everyone agree that this is an appropriate template for SVG? ====================
    Message 1 of 13 , Aug 2 7:19 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Would everyone agree that this is an appropriate template for SVG?

      ====================
      <?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>

      <svg width="300" height="300" version="1.1" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">

      <...statements here...>

      </svg>
      =====================


      - appropriate xml version?
      - No doctype...
      - appropriate svg version?
      - the appropriate xml namespace?
      - Anything else that should be included?
    • Mark Birbeck
      Might want to add the XLink namespace. Mark Birbeck CEO x-port.net Ltd. e: Mark.Birbeck@x-port.net t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/ b:
      Message 2 of 13 , Aug 2 7:38 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Might want to add the XLink namespace.


        Mark Birbeck
        CEO
        x-port.net Ltd.

        e: Mark.Birbeck@...
        t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
        w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/
        b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/

        Download our XForms processor from
        http://www.formsPlayer.com/

        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: svg-developers@yahoogroups.com
        > [mailto:svg-developers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marjorie Roswell
        > Sent: 02 August 2005 15:19
        > To: svg-developers@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [svg-developers] Basica SVG Template?
        >
        > Would everyone agree that this is an appropriate template for SVG?
        >
        > ====================
        > <?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>
        >
        > <svg width="300" height="300" version="1.1"
        > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
        >
        > <...statements here...>
        >
        > </svg>
        > =====================
        >
        >
        > - appropriate xml version?
        > - No doctype...
        > - appropriate svg version?
        > - the appropriate xml namespace?
        > - Anything else that should be included?
        >
        >
        > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > --------------------~-->
        > <font face=arial size=-1><a
        > href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12h184sfa/M=362335.6886445.7
        > 839731.1510227/D=groups/S=1706030389:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1122999560
        > /A=2894361/R=0/SIG=13jmebhbo/*http://www.networkforgood.org/to
        > pics/education/digitaldivide/?source=YAHOO&cmpgn=GRP&RTP=http:
        > //groups.yahoo.com/">In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not
        > own computers. At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital
        > Divide!</a>.</font>
        > --------------------------------------------------------------
        > ------~->
        >
        > -----
        > To unsubscribe send a message to:
        > svg-developers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > -or-
        > visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers and click
        > "edit my membership"
        > ----
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • margieroswell
        I guess I should add too. So this gives me: ========================
        Message 3 of 13 , Aug 2 8:03 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          I guess I should add <title> too.

          So this gives me:

          ========================
          <?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>

          <svg width="300" height="300" version="1.1"
          xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
          xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
          <title>Title</Title>
          <...statements here...>

          </svg>
          =======================


          It's kind of annoying that this:
          http://wiki.mozilla.org/SVG:Namespace
          Says to add a doctype, but the general feeling of this group is that
          there is no need to add the doctype, and that in fact, it gets you
          into trouble with Firefox to do so. Can anyone work with mozilla.org
          to have them change that?

          --- In svg-developers@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Birbeck"
          <Mark.Birbeck@x> wrote:
          > Might want to add the XLink namespace.
          >
          >
          > Mark Birbeck
          > CEO
          > x-port.net Ltd.
          >
          > e: Mark.Birbeck@x...
          > t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
          > w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/
          > b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/
          >
          > Download our XForms processor from
          > http://www.formsPlayer.com/
          >
          > > -----Original Message-----
          > > From: svg-developers@yahoogroups.com
          > > [mailto:svg-developers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marjorie
          Roswell
          > > Sent: 02 August 2005 15:19
          > > To: svg-developers@yahoogroups.com
          > > Subject: [svg-developers] Basica SVG Template?
          > >
          > > Would everyone agree that this is an appropriate template for
          SVG?
          > >
          > > ====================
          > > <?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>
          > >
          > > <svg width="300" height="300" version="1.1"
          > > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
          > >
          > > <...statements here...>
          > >
          > > </svg>
          > > =====================
          > >
          > >
          > > - appropriate xml version?
          > > - No doctype...
          > > - appropriate svg version?
          > > - the appropriate xml namespace?
          > > - Anything else that should be included?
        • "André M. Winter - Carto.net"
          encoding is also useful when it comes to use more than [a-z].
          Message 4 of 13 , Aug 2 8:05 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            encoding is also useful when it comes to use more than [a-z].

            <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
            <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
            xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
            [...]

            --
            ___________________________________________________________________
            andre m. winter,
            cartography for internet and multimedia applications
            a6091 goetzens, tyrol, austria
            tel.: ++43.5234.32732
            email: <winter@...>

            <http://www.vectoreal.com/> SVG consulting and development
            <http://svg.carto.net/> online cartography focusing on SVG
            <http://www.carto.at/> print and online touristic map solutions




            Marjorie Roswell a écrit :

            >Would everyone agree that this is an appropriate template for SVG?
            >
            >====================
            ><?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>
            >
            ><svg width="300" height="300" version="1.1" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
            >
            ><...statements here...>
            >
            ></svg>
            >=====================
            >
            >
            >- appropriate xml version?
            >- No doctype...
            >- appropriate svg version?
            >- the appropriate xml namespace?
            >- Anything else that should be included?
            >
            >
            >
            >-----
            >To unsubscribe send a message to: svg-developers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >-or-
            >visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers and click "edit my membership"
            >----
            >Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • margieroswell
            The encoding addition brings me to this: ========================
            Message 5 of 13 , Aug 2 8:36 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              The encoding addition brings me to this:

              ========================
              <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>

              <svg width="300" height="300" version="1.1"
              xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
              xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
              <title>Title</Title>
              <...statements here...>

              </svg>
              ===============================

              Do you know that a google search for:

              ?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?
              xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
              xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" svg

              yields only 327 documents on the entire world wide web....

              If I add "title" to the search term, I get a grand total of 61
              results.

              If I exclude doctype, I'm down to 1 lonely result.

              -----google search term that yields 1 result ------

              ?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?
              xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
              xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" svg title -doctype

              It would be nice to settle on a standard template that people
              actually use...

              Again, so far I'm up to this...feedback still welcome:

              ========================
              <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>

              <svg width="300" height="300" version="1.1"
              xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
              xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
              <title>Title</Title>
              <...statements here...>

              </svg>
              ===============================
            • Mark Birbeck
              HI, ... I think the thinking is to not use DTDs, rather than to fix Mozilla. Certainly from our point of view we would rather validate against XML schemas,
              Message 6 of 13 , Aug 2 8:39 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                HI,

                > It's kind of annoying that this:
                > http://wiki.mozilla.org/SVG:Namespace
                > Says to add a doctype, but the general feeling of this group
                > is that there is no need to add the doctype, and that in
                > fact, it gets you into trouble with Firefox to do so. Can
                > anyone work with mozilla.org to have them change that?

                I think the thinking is to not use DTDs, rather than to 'fix' Mozilla.
                Certainly from our point of view we would rather validate against XML
                schemas, and the location of those schemas is 'known' by the viewer.

                Regards,

                Mark


                Mark Birbeck
                CEO
                x-port.net Ltd.

                e: Mark.Birbeck@...
                t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
                w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/
                b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/

                Download our XForms processor from
                http://www.formsPlayer.com/
              • Holger Will
                Hi Marge ... i would maybe use a default viewBox instead of default width and height,
                Message 7 of 13 , Aug 2 9:00 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Marge

                  >
                  >
                  > Again, so far I'm up to this...feedback still welcome:
                  >
                  > ========================
                  > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
                  >
                  > <svg width="300" height="300" version="1.1"
                  > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
                  > xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
                  > <title>Title</Title>
                  > <...statements here...>
                  >
                  > </svg>
                  > ===============================

                  i would maybe use a default viewBox instead of default width and height,
                  <svg viewBox="0 0 300 300" version="1.1"
                  xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
                  xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">

                  cheers
                  Holger
                • Marjorie Roswell
                  I wasn t clear: I meant change the documentation. (How much documentation out there is telling people that they have to use a DTD for working with SVG!.) I
                  Message 8 of 13 , Aug 2 9:01 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I wasn't clear: I meant change the documentation. (How much
                    documentation out there is telling people that they have to use a DTD
                    for working with SVG!.) I realized the page I referred to is a wiki.
                    So someone who's got a login there could edit that page.

                    http://wiki.mozilla.org/SVG:Namespace


                    On 8/2/05, Mark Birbeck <Mark.Birbeck@...> wrote:
                    > HI,
                    >
                    > > It's kind of annoying that this:
                    > > http://wiki.mozilla.org/SVG:Namespace
                    > > Says to add a doctype, but the general feeling of this group
                    > > is that there is no need to add the doctype, and that in
                    > > fact, it gets you into trouble with Firefox to do so. Can
                    > > anyone work with mozilla.org to have them change that?
                    >
                    > I think the thinking is to not use DTDs, rather than to 'fix' Mozilla.
                    > Certainly from our point of view we would rather validate against XML
                    > schemas, and the location of those schemas is 'known' by the viewer.
                    >
                    > Regards,
                    >
                    > Mark
                    >
                    >
                    > Mark Birbeck
                    > CEO
                    > x-port.net Ltd.
                    >
                    > e: Mark.Birbeck@...
                    > t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
                    > w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/
                    > b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/
                    >
                    > Download our XForms processor from
                    > http://www.formsPlayer.com/
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > -----
                    > To unsubscribe send a message to:
                    > svg-developers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    > -or-
                    > visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers and
                    > click "edit my membership"
                    > ----
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ________________________________
                    > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                    >
                    > Visit your group "svg-developers" on the web.
                    >
                    > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    > svg-developers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                    > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    > svg-developers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                    > ________________________________
                    >
                  • Holger Will
                    ... you could get a login , too. if you dont want that, i could change the page. should the whole paragraph be deleted, or should just the wording be changed
                    Message 9 of 13 , Aug 2 9:15 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Marjorie Roswell schrieb:

                      > I wasn't clear: I meant change the documentation. (How much
                      > documentation out there is telling people that they have to use a DTD
                      > for working with SVG!.) I realized the page I referred to is a wiki.
                      > So someone who's got a login there could edit that page.
                      >
                      > http://wiki.mozilla.org/SVG:Namespace

                      you could get a login , too. if you dont want that, i could change the
                      page.
                      should the whole paragraph be deleted, or should just the wording be
                      changed ?
                      i'd prefere the later. somthing like:
                      "declaring a correct DOCTYPE for .svg files is *not* important but,
                      instances have been... "
                      what do you think ?

                      >
                      >
                      > On 8/2/05, Mark Birbeck <Mark.Birbeck@...> wrote:
                      > > HI,
                      > >
                      > > > It's kind of annoying that this:
                      > > > http://wiki.mozilla.org/SVG:Namespace
                      > > > Says to add a doctype, but the general feeling of this group
                      > > > is that there is no need to add the doctype, and that in
                      > > > fact, it gets you into trouble with Firefox to do so. Can
                      > > > anyone work with mozilla.org to have them change that?
                      > >
                      > > I think the thinking is to not use DTDs, rather than to 'fix' Mozilla.
                      > > Certainly from our point of view we would rather validate against XML
                      > > schemas, and the location of those schemas is 'known' by the viewer.
                      > >
                      > > Regards,
                      > >
                      > > Mark
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Mark Birbeck
                      > > CEO
                      > > x-port.net Ltd.
                      > >
                      > > e: Mark.Birbeck@...
                      > > t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
                      > > w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/
                      > > b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/
                      > >
                      > > Download our XForms processor from
                      > > http://www.formsPlayer.com/
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.