W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > March 2009

RE: SVG <title> (was: SVG Feedback on HTML5 SVG Proposal)

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:01:46 -0000
To: "'Doug Schepers'" <schepers@w3.org>, <public-html@w3.org>
Cc: "'www-svg'" <www-svg@w3.org>, <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002901c9a249$89b2d280$9d187780$@org>
Doug, thank you for cc-ing i18n, but can you point to the beginning of this thread for me?  

Cheers,
RI

============
Richard Ishida
Internationalization Lead
W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)

http://www.w3.org/International/
http://rishida.net/




> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org [mailto:public-i18n-core-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Doug Schepers
> Sent: 11 March 2009 00:39
> To: public-html@w3.org
> Cc: www-svg; public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Subject: SVG <title> (was: SVG Feedback on HTML5 SVG Proposal)
> 
> Hi, Ian-
> 
> Ian Hickson wrote (on 3/10/09 7:48 PM):
> > On Tue, 10 Mar 2009, Doug Schepers wrote:
> >>
> >>  * The SVG WG is of the opinion that the contents of the SVG 'title'
> >>  element should be RCDATA, and therefore would prefer that the HTML5
> >>  parsing algorithm not require conforming parsers to break out of
> foreign
> >>  content mode and parse the element's content as HTML.
> >
> > My thinking when I made<title>  switch to the HTML mode was that this
> was
> > necessary for supporting<ruby>, which I am told is necessary for a good
> > internationalisation story. Also, it's unclear which SVG elements one
> > should use within<title>  to annotate languages, which I am told is
> > necessary for both internationalisation and accessibility (in HTML, the
> > <span lang="">  element would seem the obvious choice).
> >
> > I don't have a strong opinion on this issue; can the SVG WG confirm that
> > <ruby>  support within<title>  is not desired and that there is some
> > SVG-specific way of doing language annotation, or that language
> annotation
> > is not needed for<title>? If so, adopting this proposal seems like a good
> > idea.
> 
> In SVG Tiny 1.2, for simplicity, we restricted <title> and <desc> to
> text elements.  We are open to more creative solutions, and your
> explanation seems to make good sense.
> 
> The SVG equivalent of <span lang=""> is <tspan xml:lang="">.  We
> considered making the content model of the <title> and <desc> elements
> match that of the <svg:text> element, but also wish to allow X/HTML
> content for document semantics like lists and such.  Up until this
> point, the SVG+X/HTML story was unclear, but with browsers natively
> implementing SVG, we now have an opportunity to sort this out.  (Do note
> that there are SVG-only UAs, so any solution there would have to only
> optionally use HTML.)  Any thoughts or comments along those lines?
> 
> Regarding <ruby> [1], I don't see a reason that ruby markup couldn't be
> used in SVG, assuming it is properly namespaced (I guess it's the XHTML
> ns?) for the SVG-XML.  Obviously, SVG text has different layout rules
> than HTML, but the semantics would remain the same.  I've CCed the i18n
> folks to comment further, if they have opinions. (And what good i18n
> person doesn't? :) )
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/
> 
> Regards-
> -Doug Schepers
> W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 13:08:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:41 GMT