W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > February 2013

Re: minutes, SVG F2F Pymont, Sydney day 5 (08/02/2013)

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 09:01:28 +1100
Message-ID: <CAGN7qDCwu0E-v=5JOXfV2PijZOa4+zMi3iEd820NvxPOX8yS-Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: robert@ocallahan.org
Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think everyone was in agreement that we don't want to limit the SVG
>> feature set or add features just for SVG OpenType fonts.
>> We can let it up to the user agent to gracefully degrade the experience
>> if they don't support a particular feature (ie video could just show the
>> poster frame).
>> We were thinking of not allowing foreignObject since that can pull in
>> HTML and might be harder to control securily.
> I think we should allow foreignObject. Web renderers can handle it. I
> think there's a high chance at some point we'll allow including HTML in SVG
> without foreignObject at which point preventing that in fonts or images
> will become more difficult. Generally as SVG and HTML converge preventing
> foreignObject will become less relevant.
> Yes, if that happens, it should be allowed.

Will this require changes to the HTML parser? (ie all external references
such as script blocks should be disallowed) Would the HTML content reflow
when the glyph is resized?

Also, my fear is that people will abuse it and just make HTML characters.
Received on Friday, 8 February 2013 22:01:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:31 UTC