- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 11:26:03 +0100
- CC: anatoly techtonik <techtonik@gmail.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Jelle wrote: > > In this case SVG2 is about to create the problem of having to revert to > previous generation technology to do the task the standard is much better > suited to. Yes, we can include some HTML text into our document to do > textflow in one of those ugly rectangular shapes without any control over If you try to flow text into something more complicated, it is almost certainly only going to work for one font and font size, unless you have an extensive amount of hinting. If the author is going to tweak font sizes, etc., to get the appearance they want, that can be done in the authoring tool. > kerning and layout as we've done the past 20+ years. Same for text inputs > and the like. Technically, kerning and layout are handled by CSS, not by HTML. > > I don quite get the idea that SVG should be reduced to creating vector > illustration and larded with javascript libraries to produce the > functionality everyone in the design industry has been waiting for for so > long. I'm afraid that is the sort of argument that does result in standards bloat. As standards do bloat, it means that it may still get included. I'd actually suggest that one of the big attractions of SVG is that text is not fluid, as a lot of designers want the consumer to see the page exactly as they designed it. A lot of HTML accessibility problems are the result of trying to treat it as a final form language, and ignoring the consequences of re-flow. -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Monday, 22 April 2013 10:26:33 UTC