- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 13:16:34 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Benjamin Lesh <blesh@netflix.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Benjamin Lesh <blesh@netflix.com> wrote: >> What are your thoughts on this idea? > > I think it would be more natural (HTML-parser-wise) if we > special-cased SVG elements, similar to how e.g. table elements are > special-cased today. A lot of <template>-parsing logic is set up so > that things work without special effort. Absolutely. Forcing authors to write, or even *think* about, namespaces in HTML is a complete usability failure, and utterly unnecessary. The only conflicts in the namespaces are <font> (deprecated in SVG2), <script> and <style> (harmonizing with HTML so there's no difference), and <a> (attempting to harmonize API surface). If you just looked at the root element, skipping through <a>s, you could do the same magical mode selection we currently do for <tr>/etc. Ideally we could do this by just pulling SVG into the HTML namespace, which the SVGWG is comfortable with, but no implementors have felt like doing it yet. :/ ~TJ
Received on Friday, 13 March 2015 20:17:21 UTC