Re: [svgwg] Why most of SVG 2 properties are not presentational? (#900)

>  Why is that?

As I recall, at the time that was written, the general feeling among the
browser developers was that they didn't want to keep adding more and more
attributes.
I don't know if that is still the case.

I tried looking for a reference, in the www-svg mail archive ,to back me
up, but it's tricky because the search terms are too common.  I'm confident
one of the actual developers here will back me up.



On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 at 00:31, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann ***@***.***>
wrote:

> There seems to be a new 'Charter' now for the working group, but this year
> no visible activity or discussion to fix all these bugs or to complete SVG
> 2 to something meaningful for authors by adding the features, once
> identified to be required for SVG 2. Even worse, in the last charter
> period, most of already defined features were removed again.
> If nothing ist changed, SVG 2 can be considered to be failed for authors.
> Authors should ignore the draft simply.
> Implementors should care to complete at least the full set of SVG 1.1 and
> SVG tiny 1.2 before publishing any software, that contains additional funny
> changes due to the SVG 2 draft. This would be a progress already for
> authors.
>
> About styling prooerties: Even fill and stroke are typically not only
> styling.
> Often only fill without stroke or stroke without fill is used - nonsense
> to claim, that this is redundant information concerning understanding.
> Even different colors of different objects typically contains information,
> because it is used to indicate, that these are different objects, not
> joined together - or the other way arround, overlapping with the same color
> in a group, that they represent one object, because those draft about
> composition (draft from 2011!) is not available yet.
>
> More about inactivity:
> Draft about connectors: 2011, draft about transforms from 2009, parameters
> from 2009, SVG integration from 2014.
> Some efforts ended as a note like accessibility? :-(
> Well, at least some activity on Animation 2 (but only an editors draft
> from this year for a basic feature of SVG 2)
>
> Looking at these dates, not much efforts in the past ~10 years about SVG
> at all.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/900#issuecomment-1321914066>, or
> unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGNEYA3NAFXCMXLFSZO5ILWJNMP3ANCNFSM6AAAAAASGLAWYY>
> .
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
> ID: ***@***.***>
>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by BigBadaboom
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/900#issuecomment-1323069211 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Tuesday, 22 November 2022 04:59:48 UTC