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

Re: SVG in text/html

From: G. Wade Johnson <gwadej@anomaly.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:41:27 -0500
To: www-svg@w3.org
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20090325214127.58ef685a@sovvan>
For what it's worth, I agree with Doug here.

I'm also one of the outliers, almost all of my SVG is either authored
by hand or generated from code that I built by hand.

Also my experience with teaching people HTML back in the early days was
that rules like "always quote all attribute values" made it easier for
the people I taught to learn.

But maybe that's just me.

While I'm all for anything that spreads SVG, I fear that the tag-soup
approach will make things worse.

G. Wade

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:16:33 -0400
Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi, Folks-
> 
> Sorry, forgot to complete one of my sentences.... correction below.
> 
> Doug Schepers wrote (on 3/25/09 9:09 PM):
> >
> > Given this fragment:
> > <html><svg><g><circle ...><animateTransform ...><rect
> > ...><title></title></svg></html>
> >
> > This is the resulting tree:
> > <html>
> > <svg>
> > <g>
> > <circle ...>
> > <animateTransform ...>
> > <rect ... >
> > <title></title>
> > </rect>
> > </animateTransform>
> > </circle>
> > </g>
> > </svg>
> > </html>
> >
> > (Albeit with parse errors.) This results in a rendered circle that
> > is animated. The rectangle is not rendered. It's not clear whether
> > the title belongs to the circle or the rect. If these had been
> > self-closing elements had been closed properly,
> 
> If these had been self-closing elements, the tree would look like
> this:
> 
>   <html>
>    <svg>
>     <g>
>      <circle .../>
>      <animateTransform .../>
>      <rect ... />
>      <title></title>
>     </g>
>    </svg>
>   </html>
> 
> Which would result in a circle and rectangle, in a group that's 
> animated, with a title for the group.  This is quite a different
> tree, with different effects.
> 
> This one is a pretty obvious case, but there will be other cases that 
> are not so clear.  Aything involving non-rendering elements
> (including <title> and <desc> elements) will be less apparently
> broken, and so harder to catch.  There may also be performance
> effects if filters or such are applied to a fragment with incorrect
> structure.
> 
> Again, the people who are least likely to know how to recognize and
> fix a problem are the most likely to get caught by something like
> this.  In the order of constituencies, this negatively impacts the
> authors and users of the language much more than the implementers or
> spec writers. If that is truly the order that we are considering, I
> think this particular decision should be reexamined.
> 
> Regards-
> -Doug Schepers
> W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
> 


-- 
Never express yourself more clearly than you think.    -- Niels Bohr
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 02:42:19 GMT

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