Just two quick comments:
- Requires: groff doesn't seem to be necessary
- drop INSTALL from %doc as it's not of much use in a binary package

Ben, I'll do both reviews.

Do you mind reviewing this small package for me please ?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505264

Missing timestamps during make install :

make INSTALL="install -p" install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}

The package looks good. Update the spec file too in accordance to the comment #1. I'll finalize the package review.

Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/pdf2svg/pdf2svg.spec
SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/pdf2svg/pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc11.src.rpm

Fixed.

- MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}
- MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: The package is licensed (GPLv2+) with an open-source compatible license
and meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
- MUST: the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file,
then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is
included in %doc.
- MUST: the package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
- MUST: the package owns all directories that it creates.
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
- MUST: The spec file for the package is be legible. 
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
- MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least i586.
- MUST: All build dependencies is listed in BuildRequires.
- MUST: The spec file handles locales properly.: No locales in this package
- MUST: the package is not designed to be relocatable
- MUST: Permissions on files are set properly.
- MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: The package contains code, or permissible content. This is described in
detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: There are no Large documentation files
- MUST: %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If
it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present.
- MUST: There are no Header files or static libraries 
- MUST: The package does not contain library files with a suffix 
- MUST: Package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives
- MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. 

SHOULD Items:

 - SHOULD: The source package doesn't include license text(s) as COPYING
 - SHOULD: mock builds succcessfully in i586.
 - SHOULD: The reviewer tested that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
 - SHOULD:  Those scriptlets used are sane. 
 - SHOULD: No subpackages present.

Approved

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: pdf2svg
Short Description: Small tool to convert PDF files into SVG
Owners: mathstuf
Branches: F-10 F-11 F-12
InitialCC:

cvs done.

pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc11

pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc12

pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.