Re: figure role backgrounds

>
> Both Anne and Amelia made assertions about the plans, goals, and desires
> of the SVG WG. I don't think it's accurate to pigeonhole the SVG WG this
> way, because there are differing opinions in the group.
>

Fair criticism. I should have been more clear:
There are no current plans (such as, draft specs or any formal statements
of intent by SVG WG) to allow arbitrary HTML in SVG. That doesn't mean this
couldn't change in the future. But as presently spec'd and planned, any
semantics in SVG, other than links and generic grouping, must be expressed
through ARIA roles.