Re: More on SVG within HTML pages

On Sep 7, 2009, at 12:11, James Graham wrote:

> Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Sep 7, 2009, at 11:21, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>> 1) Leave RDF/XML-looking stuff non-conforming. Bad because copy- 
>>> pasting leads to a lot of errors about stuff that browsers will  
>>> ignore--just like they ignore the contents of <metadata> in XML.
>> This is violation of our Design Principles, because it puts  
>> theoretical purity ahead of users who copy and paste.
> I'm not sure this is theoretical purity. The "namespaced" stuff  
> won't work as expected in HTML documents because it won't actually  
> be in the expected namespace or have the expected localname  
> (assuming people are basing their expectations on Namespaces in  
> XML). Therefore whatever processes people have for working with this  
> metadata from SVG/XML documents won't work as expected when fed  
> input from a text/html parser.

I agree that this isn't theoretical purity at all if the author  
expectation of "works" is that the markup produces RDF triples  
somewhere down the line.

My premise here was that for a typical author who is copying and  
pasting SVG clipart, RDF and metadata are theory and what matters is  
that all that has no effect and some vector graphics are safely  

Henri Sivonen

Received on Monday, 7 September 2009 09:20:04 UTC