W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2008

Re: several messages about New Vocabularies in text/html

From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:42:29 -0400
Message-ID: <47F43605.4000504@w3.org>
To: public-html@w3.org

Hi, Simon-

Simon Pieters wrote (on 4/2/08 10:38 AM):
> Until I see actual pages that contain non-MathML in <math> or non-SVG in 
> <svg>, I'm not convinced that Henri's scoped parsing proposal[1] doesn't 
> work. Do you perhaps have such data at hand so I can take a look and be 
> convinced? :-)

Since "math" is a real word, I would not at all be surprised by somebody 
making a "<math>" element.  "SVG" shows up as an acronym for "St. 
Vincent and the Grenadines", but I don't think they have their own 
national markup language.

> Also, on a slightly different note, I think that for copy-pastability of 
> SVG in text/html, the parser needs to make /> self-close elements, since 
> e.g. <circle> can have contents (e.g. animation stuff, I think) 

All SVG elements can have such child content, such as <title> and 
<desc>, and also namespaced XML, RDF (as referenced before), etc.  It's 
a design feature of SVG.

Some elements can also have text content as a child (<text>, <tspan>, 
<textPath>, <title>, etc.).

An appropriate parsing model for HTML is not necessarily an appropriate 
parsing model for a language not designed with the same constraints or 
for the same kinds of use cases and content.  Round peg, square hole.

> and Sam Ruby said that some tools emit <defs/> and <g/>. [2]

Not just tools.  I (and others) deliberately do this as structured 
placeholder elements for SVG Webapps, inserting content via script 
later.  I could add these too via script, but there is already content 
out there that does this.

-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG, CDF, and WebAPI
Received on Thursday, 3 April 2008 01:42:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:32 UTC