- From: G. Wade Johnson <gwadej@anomaly.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 06:55:34 -0500
- To: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, www-svg WG <www-svg@w3.org>
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:19:10 +0000 Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > 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". I agree. Since most of the SVG I've produced in the last 6ish years has used <style>. > 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...) G. Wade -- Trying to outsmart a compiler defeats much of the purpose of using one. -- Brian Kernighan and P.J. Plauger
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 11:56:25 UTC