- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 11:43:56 +0200
- To: Dana Lee Ling <dleeling@comfsm.fm>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On Mar 6, 2009, at 08:03, Dana Lee Ling wrote: > Robin Berjon wrote the following on 3/5/2009 8:51 PM: >> On Mar 5, 2009, at 09:25 , Henri Sivonen wrote: >>> I don't have an informed opinion yet on whether enabling <svg> as >>> root in text/html is a good idea. >> >> Scratching my head a little, I see no good reason not to allow it. >> In fact, I think it would be a very good idea if we can work around >> some of the few kinks. >> > As someone who uses a text editor to write SVG in XHTML+MathMl+SVG, > I am somewhat unclear on the use case for an <svg> root. Maybe I am > confused, but someone wants to start a document something like <! > DOCTYPE svg> followed by SVG elements with some HTML elements > embedded in amongst the SVG? There is a reason to do this? There a some ad agency-created "high impact" marketing sites created in Flash. These tend to put text views inside a vector graphics enclosure. To create similar sites with Open Web technologies, one might want to have an <svg> root and then HTML content in a <foreignObject>. However, the HTML bits would suffer from all the usual ill-formedness of HTML if pulled from a CMS built for text/html and not for XML, so text/html would work for such HTML islands better than image/svg+xml. > A reason that simply using XHTML will not work? There's no "simply" in using XHTML. :-) The (X)HTML bits could easily come from a system that can't guarantee well-formedness. > Even when the page is dominantly an SVG graphic with a hunk of XHTML > code inserted as a foreignObject, http://www.comfsm.fm/~dleeling/kinesiology/runshine.xhtml > , I still do not see that the savings starting off in <svg>. Having an SVG root has different behavior wrt. sizing the content to the view port. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 9 March 2009 09:44:50 UTC