- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 01:13:40 -0400
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On 5/13/11 12:26 AM, Doug Schepers wrote: >> From Gecko's perspective, "Animated Mode" is NOT acceptable for >> <html:img>, and not acceptable for <svg:image> for the same reasons. > > I've heard differently from other browser vendors. What's your rationale? See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=628747 If other browser vendors choose to expose their users to that sort of privacy leak, I guess that's up to them. But the spec shouldn't recommend using this mode for things like <html:img> without highlighting the possible issues that result. Did this never get brought up on this list? The plan was to bring it up here... >> We also have no plans to do different things for <img> and background >> images (hence there is no point in "Static Mode" from our point of view; >> it's not like we prevent animated GIFs or APNG in CSS backgrounds, so >> why would we prohibit declarative animation of SVG?). > > Okay. Again, others have been of a different opinion OK. Again, I have no problem with the mode existing so much (I can always just ignore its existence as an implementor); I have problems with the spec recommending, for reasons that are unclear to me, that animated SVG not be supported in CSS background images. -Boris
Received on Friday, 13 May 2011 05:14:09 UTC