Re: MathML in the SVG 2 spec

Hi,

On May 18, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Cameron McCormack wrote:

> Dirk Schulze:
>> Have you seen the discussion on public-fx? I would not use it at this point of time.
> 
> I had not; thanks for pointing it out.
I think it is to early to do this. For browsers that do not support MathML, the complete MathML code gets replaced by HTML code or SVG code and is no longer accessible by users of screen readers. That itself is in conflict with the idea of MathML and doesn't help at all. The semantics get lost completely. Not all people with the need of screen readers use Internet Explorer and the Math plugin. And there are still browsers like Chrome that don't support MathML. This becomes more problematic once we see laptops with ChromeOS and ChromeVOX. Therefore we should think about it twice. For the meantime I would like to see it removed again untill we have a decision in the W3C with other WGs, including the MathML WG. We should continue the discussion on a public accessible mailing list, ideal on the existing threat on www-style/public-fx.

> 
> By the way, the SVG 1.1 Second Edition spec (as well as the Web IDL and 
> HTML5 specs) use small amounts of JS to enhance their presentation, but 
> they are presentable just fine without them.
> 
> Recent pubrules (a couple of months back?) allow SVG and MathML in specs 
> now, as long as there is a fallback.  The use of MathJax is an 
> acceptable fallback IMO.
> 
> I similarly replaced a couple of PNG figures directly with their SVG 
> versions, referenced by <img>.  I haven't added in the fallback yet.  My 
> feeling is that using SVG 1.1 (without filters, and perhaps without SMIL 
> animation) should be acceptable for diagrams/examples in the SVG 2 spec.

I already do this in the CSS3 Transforms, but am prepared to replace the images by PNGs in case we see a noticeable count of people with problems.

Greetings,
Dirk

Received on Friday, 18 May 2012 10:38:58 UTC