W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > October 2011

Re: SVG title when used via HTML img

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 10:51:28 -0700
Message-Id: <A8E4DE2F-98B5-4D27-A6CC-661CE3FF398D@jumis.com>
Cc: "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
To: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>

On Oct 28, 2011, at 10:03 AM, "Erik Dahlstrom" <ed@opera.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 04:55:04 -0700, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure which group to bring this issue to:
>> Proposal:
>> <img src="myimage.svg" />
>> would pick up the title in the SVG file and use it as though title were set on the image tag.
>> It works for <iframe src="myimage.svg"> and for inline SVG. But with <img src>, no luck.
>> Also,
>> <img src="myimage.svg" longdesc="myimage.svg" /> seems a little redundant.
>> SVG has <title> and <description>, but the <img> tag wasn't designed with those in mind.
>> None of the targets <img> previously supported contained reasonably useful title/description content.
>> Ideas anyone?
>> Google's SVG viewer also seems to suffer, it does not show the <title> of the image.
>> All viewers understand that <img> means static SVG content, no scripts, limited references, and so forth. But it seems that most of them neglect to process title. Am I doing something wrong there?
> They don't neglect it, it's just that all interactivity inside the svg file is disabled, it's as if the svg was a raster image.
> What you're proposing seems similar to asking for EXIF data to be used as title.

Yes, it's similar. It's just that SVG is explicitly intended for the semantic whereas EXIF is a more general mechanism.

I am not asking that this be applied to other formats-- just that it be explored for SVG.
Received on Friday, 28 October 2011 17:51:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:32 UTC