- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:42:29 -0400
- To: public-html@w3.org
Hi, Simon- Simon Pieters wrote (on 4/2/08 10:38 AM): > > Until I see actual pages that contain non-MathML in <math> or non-SVG in > <svg>, I'm not convinced that Henri's scoped parsing proposal[1] doesn't > work. Do you perhaps have such data at hand so I can take a look and be > convinced? :-) Since "math" is a real word, I would not at all be surprised by somebody making a "<math>" element. "SVG" shows up as an acronym for "St. Vincent and the Grenadines", but I don't think they have their own national markup language. > Also, on a slightly different note, I think that for copy-pastability of > SVG in text/html, the parser needs to make /> self-close elements, since > e.g. <circle> can have contents (e.g. animation stuff, I think) All SVG elements can have such child content, such as <title> and <desc>, and also namespaced XML, RDF (as referenced before), etc. It's a design feature of SVG. Some elements can also have text content as a child (<text>, <tspan>, <textPath>, <title>, etc.). An appropriate parsing model for HTML is not necessarily an appropriate parsing model for a language not designed with the same constraints or for the same kinds of use cases and content. Round peg, square hole. > and Sam Ruby said that some tools emit <defs/> and <g/>. [2] Not just tools. I (and others) deliberately do this as structured placeholder elements for SVG Webapps, inserting content via script later. I could add these too via script, but there is already content out there that does this. Regards- -Doug Schepers W3C Team Contact, SVG, CDF, and WebAPI
Received on Thursday, 3 April 2008 01:42:59 UTC