W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2005

Re: several messages

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:29:16 -0500
Message-ID: <4356583C.8060904@mit.edu>
To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
CC: www-style@w3.org

Robin Berjon wrote:
>> I believe that many issues have been raised over the years along these
>> lines (e.g. the fact that 'font' in SVG 1.0 is not compatible with 'font'
>> in CSS1 was raised many years ago -- still not addressed, by the way).
> To the best of my knowledge this specific issue was never raised, 
> despite at least three formal reviews of the SVG specification by the 

It's been raised a number of times just in the time I've been watching the 
www-svg list, by multiple people and in formal CSS WG comments.  One issue is 
that the treatment of line-height in 'font' is different in SVG (where unitless 
line-height means user units) and CSS (where unitless line-height means 
multiplier by the font-size).  This has definitely been raised quite recently.

I agree that searching the www-svg archives for this issue is hard, though 
searching on "font shorthand css" got me some of the emails on the subject from 
1999 (eg http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/1999Apr/0028.html).  These 
talk about another issue than the line-height one -- the fact that font-weight 
and font-size cannot be told apart if one allows unitless lengths.

I'm not trying to start a thread here on whether SVG should be using unitless 
lengths, but the impact of using them is that parsing CSS "the SVG way" is not 
the same as parsing it "the CSS spec way".

>> Consider. Would the SVG working group object to the CSS working group
>> introducing an <svg:flow> element to the SVG namespace?
> If done in coordination and with review from the SVG WG, no, probably not.

And if done over the objections of the SVG WG?

I'm sorry to see you trying for the moral high ground on the subject of 
interaction between CSS and SVG; I don't believe there is any moral high ground 
to be had on this sordid topic.

-Boris (who is not a member of either of the working groups involved, but just 
trying to implement the broken result of many twisty specifications, all 
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2005 14:29:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:21 UTC