- From: Peter Sorotokin <psorotok@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:50:14 -0800
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Cc: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, www-svg@w3.org
At 01:41 PM 11/3/2004 -0800, Peter Sorotokin wrote: >At 04:22 PM 11/3/2004 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote: > >>On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Robin Berjon wrote: >> > >> > Ever seen poetry laid out inside a shape? Ever seen ad text following >> > the shiny curves of the latest spacecraft? Ever seen some sombre lament >> > about the passing of time animated as it falls through an hourglass? >> > *That* is what it's for. It's for text when used as graphics. >> >>All three of those examples are great examplies of documents that need >>semantic markup. > >Might - or might not. What is your point: that the feature can be abused >or that the feature _never_ does the right thing? > >I gave (earlier in this thread), these three examples: maps, schematics >and diagrams. > >Just look at basically any printed map and you'll see a lot of line breaks >(definitely *every* one of my AAA maps uses multi-line labels a lot). >Complex diagrams and schematics also use them quite a bit. What is even >more important in all of the above cases is that *text is in the shape*. >It might not even have word wrapping there, it might be, in fact, a single >word, but it is extremely important that it is simply *placed* in the shape. > >Yet another example is almost anything produced in modern illustration >authoring tools, such as Illustrator or CorellDraw. Text in these drawings >cannot be accurately captured in SVG 1.1. > >> Sure, they are presented with lovely shapes. But at the >>heart of the issue, they are still text, and it would make just as much >>sense for them to be rendered aurally using a speech CSS stylesheet, or to >>a TTY using a UA's built-in styling rules, or to have them indexed using >>Semantic Web inference rules. >> >>If those three examples are examples of when multiline text is to be used >>in SVG, then multiline text in SVG should be done by applying SVG to >>documents in other markup languages, not by adding more text markup to >>SVG, in clear violation of both AWWW and WCAG. > >Again, according to this (quite radical I should say) argument, SVG must >not have any text whatsoever. Text is still text, even if it is only a >single word. It does not matter for anything above that text is multiline. >Along the same lines as above, one could even easily argue that SVG itself >should "should not", of course >have happened, as fundamentally, anything that SVG has lacks semantics: >there should not be an svg:circle element, but there should be, say, >cosmos:sun and cosmos:earth. If you disagree with a need for purely >presentational languages in principle (and SVG is presentational language, >XSL:FO is another and SMIL to some extent too), than there is little point >in arguing about particular features of such languages. > >Right now people position diagram/map/schematics/illustration labels >absolutely. You are saying that if we give them ability to do exactly the >same thing, but express a connection between the label and the shape, so >that tools and UAs can actually extract that connection, that will somehow >worsen accessibility? I think it will improve it. > >Again, I am all for the integration with CSS flows in the future, but it >should not prevent SVG 1.2 from adding purely presentational, graphics >layout features to the language, even if it has to do with text. > >Peter > > >>-- >>Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL >>http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. >>Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' >
Received on Wednesday, 3 November 2004 21:51:49 UTC