W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2009

Re: SVG Feedback on HTML5 SVG Proposal

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 09:12:23 -0000
To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: "Doug Schepers" <schepers@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.uqmeixdt64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 09:07:09 -0000, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>> The tags listed were found to be tags that currently exist in Web  
>> content that has <svg> start tags. (It turns out there's quite a few  
>> pages out
>> there that have <svg> tags in them, for no apparent reason. The goal  
>> with this list is to avoid breaking these pages too much.)
> What quantity of content are we talking about here. From what I
> understand this list is in part based on experience from Opera in
> experiments with deploying SVG support in text/html, is this correct?

Nope, the list came from a non-scientific study at Google.

> With developing Firefox I have found that it is a lot easier to
> "break" pages if there is a spec we can point at showing that what we
> are doing is according to spec. Though this applies mostly to newly
> created pages that are still being maintained. *possibly* this is the
> case with pages that include random <svg> tags.
> So in other words, I think it would be worth trying to fight with a
> few developers whos pages we break, if we can significantly improve
> the spec by making it cleaner.

I sort of agree, though some pages (can't find the pointers right now)  
would break quite badly if we did this.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 09:13:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:43 UTC