- From: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:19:10 +0000
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, www-svg WG <www-svg@w3.org>
Robin Berjon wrote: > On Mar 18, 2009, at 09:24 , Jonas Sicking wrote: >> It would be great if we could allow the same set of tags to affect the >> parser the same way in both HTML mode and in foreign content mode. The >> only two tags that seem troublesome here is <script> and <style>. It >> sounds like it might possibly might be agreement that it would be >> possible to parse <script> as CDATA, which would leave <style> as the >> only remaining controversial tag. > > I think it could be acceptable to break <style> for SVG. While <script> > is commonplace, <style> is pretty rare as a) it's not in Tiny, 2) using > CSS for SVG is only useful in some limited cases, and iii) external > style sheets are generally preferred and are brought in with a PI. It might be nice to quantify "pretty rare". Looking at a random 300 SVG files from Wikipedia six months ago, I see 3 using <style>: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Components_of_the_United_States_money_supply2.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dice_analogy-_5_dimensions.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Johnston_Diagram-_B.svg Those are all pretty straightforward styling of text, and the CSS has no funny characters like '<' or anything. So... This is very far from conclusive evidence about anything, but it does suggest that some people use <style> but they wouldn't mind if it was parsed as CDATA. (It'd be nice to have a way of checking a wider range of SVG content for these kinds of issues...) -- Philip Taylor pjt47@cam.ac.uk
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 11:19:47 UTC