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

RE: [svg-developers] Basica SVG Template?

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 13 , Aug 2, 2005
      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 2 of 13 , Aug 2, 2005
        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 3 of 13 , Aug 2, 2005
          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 4 of 13 , Aug 2, 2005
            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 5 of 13 , Aug 2, 2005
              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 6 of 13 , Aug 2, 2005
                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 7 of 13 , Aug 2, 2005
                  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 8 of 13 , Aug 2, 2005
                    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.