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

Re: What namespace features popular SVG tools really emit (ISSUE-37)

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 20:11:00 +0000 (UTC)
To: Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>
Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0809032009580.16420@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 3 Sep 2008, Erik Dahlström wrote:
> <!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN"
>     "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd">
> <svg viewBox="0 0 100 100">
>   <circle cx="50" cy="50" r="25" fill="blue"/>
> </svg>
> Bad practise or not, this is still rendered as svg in Opera, and I 
> believe it would cause a sizable portion of content to fail to render if 
> it was changed to be stricter.

If this is the case, then, given that we don't want to encourage DOCTYPEs 
to be given in the middle of text/html content, this argues strongly for 
requiring that we support <svg> elements in text/html without explicit 
namespace declarations, something that the commented-out proposal does 
support, and something that the SVGWG's proposal does not.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2008 20:11:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:38 UTC