[svgwg] Issue: Identify SVG1 elements that are obsolete in SVG2 marked as Needs WG input

svgeesus has just labeled an issue for https://github.com/w3c/svgwg as "Needs WG input":

== Identify SVG1 elements that are obsolete in SVG2  ==
Amelia: To slightly derail the conversation. This will be one of a number of obsolete elements from SVG 1. I think we may need to at least list them somewhere, for parsing purposes. E.g., HTML still recognizes these as valid SVG elements, even if they aren't implemented.

chris:I agree with Amelia that this needs to be done

AmeliaBR: Not against making it obsolete, just some clean-up work required.

Bogdan: Do we have a list of those elements?

Amelia: Not currently in the spec.

Bogdan: OK, so we'd need to compare with SVG 1 to see what has been removed.

Dirk: I wonder what Edge & other browsers currently do with these elements. Does the HTML parser already have special parsing rules for cursor element?

Amelia: That's a good question. Don't know the answer.

Bogdan: I know HTML spec says you shouldn't implement cursor, but I don't know beyond that.

Amelia: And there are other obsolete elements. Font-related elements, plus a few others.
https://oreillymedia.github.io/Using_SVG/guide/markup.html#obsolete

Dirk: Maybe best to discuss with the HTML editors, about what they think we should do.

Bogdan: I think we (Microsoft team) can take an action item to look into best ways forward.


See https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/448

Received on Saturday, 22 September 2018 22:12:17 UTC