Re: Inline HTML

On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de> wrote:
> if you do not insist on HTML,
> if you are able to use XHTML or another XML,
> you can already put it into a foreignObject, desc or
> metadata element.
> Viewers with the capability to present XHTML should be
> able to present it in SVG as well.
> I think, SVG does not exclude, that such XHTML is
> interpreted in the same way as XHTML in a separate document.

The reasoning behind us moving to include HTML more directly is that
using <foreignObject><html xmlns=...>etc is pretty inconvenient, for
something we'd like to make easier and more convenient.

> HTML tag soup inside an XML language like SVG might
> be complex - because one needs a specific tag soup parser
> for this, not just an XML parser.
> And it might be a lot of work for SVG to define rules for
> non XML content to transform it to something meaningful.

The HTML parser is completely defined.

> Once I suggested something to include just raw data
> without any tags for interpretation in SVG, to make such
> data accessible and SVG somehow useful and accessible
> for scientific applications, but this was already rejected to be
> too complex. Rules for tag soup are far more complex as can be
> seen by the HTML5 drafts, that try to define some
> behaviour for this ;o)

There's a difference between "complex and undefined" and "complex, but
completely defined, to the last detail".

~TJ

Received on Saturday, 16 November 2013 17:17:11 UTC