W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2004

Re: Reconsider SVG 1.2

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 19:59:29 +0000 (UTC)
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Cc: Ronan Oger <ronan@roasp.com>, Peter Sorotokin <psorotok@adobe.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0411181856420.24630@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>


On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Chris Lilley wrote:
> 
> most worrying of all, apparently the CSS WG (or some vocal spokespeople 
> for it) believe that CSS should not be used with random XML at all - 
> only HTML should be used.

To clarify: the assertion to which you refer is that CSS is an optional 
layer, and that the markup sent over the wire should be in a language that 
is natively recognised by the user's agent.

This isn't a CSS matter -- it's basic accessibility, it applies whether 
CSS is involved or not. WCAG guidelines 9 and 11 are based on this 
concept:

   http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/#gl-device-independence
   http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/#gl-use-w3c

So it's not that "CSS should not be used with random XML at all", it's 
simply that you shouldn't use random XML at all in the first place.

IMHO, CSS works well with SVG, for example it allows SVG links to be a 
different colour based on whether the link is visited or not, and allows 
applications to give hover feedback easily, with alternate stylesheets it 
allows different looks to be easily applied to the same basic shape, and 
so forth. Much the same advantages that HTML gets from CSS. Of course CSS 
isn't _required_ for either; it is, by design, an optional layer.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 18 November 2004 19:59:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:52 UTC