From: Ian R. Christian <irc4oss@ho...> - 2002-02-18 22:10:11
I'll take w3c.dom.stylesheets, w3c.dom.traversals, & w3c.dom.views, as
well as chapter 6 (Basic shapes) of w3c.dom.svg.
Also, I was thinking about all of those valuable comments in the Batik
java sources. All of the comments in org.w3c.dom.* were written by the
W3C. I haven't read the license at http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/,
but I would imagine, unless the Batik project is out of bounds, it is
okay to include their comments in our interface definitions? I assume
the JUMP tool removed them all from the SharpVectors.zip file I
received? Shouldn't these comments remain in the work we're doing (as
C# xml documentation comments of course)?
As far as YahooGroups, I'm okay with whatever the group decides.
However, I can tell getting the CVS repository up and running will soon
[mailto:svgdomcsharp-developers-admin@...] On Behalf
Of Donald Kackman
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 10:56 AM
Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] divide and conquer
In order to keep track of who's doing what for the initial translation
phase, I've put a table of what I know thus far about how the work is
being parsed out:
I've signd myself up for
Let me know if you've already claimed any of those groups. Also let me
know if you're not in the grid and you should be or if I've placed you
with something you're not doing.
Also, I've made an assumption about the contents of the w3c.dom.svg
namespace. I am assuming that the 183 files in that namespace roughly
correspond to chapters 6 through 21 in the SVG spec. I have made entries
for each of these chapters. So far Kurt has Animation and Stefan has
Coordinate Systems, Transformations and Units.
Let me know if this categorization makes sense for now.
Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list