OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Public Comment

Comment from: mental@rydia.net

Since the OpenDocument specification was brought to my attention, I have become concerned with the way OpenDocument is utilising the SVG namespace.

In contrast to e.g. XLink, SVG does not specify any globally qualified attributes (e.g. svg:width, etc), but only unqualified attributes on specific SVG elements[1].

Consequently, using attributes like svg:width is meaningless in the context of SVG and also serves to pollute the SVG namespace.  Using the SVG namespace in this fashion is arguably worse than not using it at all.

The simplest alternative would be to leave things as they are, except make these (otherwise non-standard) OpenDocument attributes unqualified rather than putting them into the SVG namespace.

Using e.g. <draw:rect> rather than <svg:rect> seems like something of a missed opportunity though, even if it would carry some additional well-formedness constraints...


[1] See section 5.2 and Appendix A (sections 2 and 3) of the XML Namespaces recommendation.  In the language of the appendix, SVG does not specify any attribute names in the global attribute partition (as svg:width would be), but only attributes in per-element-type partitions (no namespace/prefix).

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]