W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2012

Re: solidColor

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 01:39:07 +0200
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Cc: SVG public list <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <46bgr7tbdpartf603gqql8rmn0a29ujtbb@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Cameron McCormack wrote:
>Although I think the usefulness of the <solidColor> element will be 
>reduced once CSS Variables gets some uptake, I realise we have already 
>resolved to include it in SVG2.

Well, http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-CSS-potential#id05684046681 this is not
exactly a new idea, but the CSS Working Group is not really quick, and
neither are browser developers, to pick up such features, and SVG imple-
mentations do not appear to be on the upgrade fast track either. Given
that the Working Group seems to plan for SVG 2 being (feature-) complete
in half a year from now, that does not seem to be a notable issue at the

>I have a question about the name <solidColor>, though, since it's camel 
>case.  What is our naming strategy going forward?  Every time we 
>introduce a new camel case element name, the HTML parser will need to be 
>updated, and there will be a period of time in which the element will 
>parse differently in text/html documents.  (Maybe this is not a huge 
>problem, since these current browsers will also not implement the 
>relevant behaviour for the element?)

(You would probably attract more attention to this question with a sepa-
rate thread with a relevant subject line.)
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Saturday, 19 May 2012 23:39:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:35 UTC