On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren <ann...@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Benjamin Lesh <bl...@netflix.com> wrote: >> What are your thoughts on this idea? > > I think it would be more natural (HTML-parser-wise) if we > special-cased SVG elements, similar to how e.g. table elements are > special-cased today. A lot of <template>-parsing logic is set up so > that things work without special effort.
Absolutely. Forcing authors to write, or even *think* about, namespaces in HTML is a complete usability failure, and utterly unnecessary. The only conflicts in the namespaces are <font> (deprecated in SVG2), <script> and <style> (harmonizing with HTML so there's no difference), and <a> (attempting to harmonize API surface). If you just looked at the root element, skipping through <a>s, you could do the same magical mode selection we currently do for <tr>/etc. Ideally we could do this by just pulling SVG into the HTML namespace, which the SVGWG is comfortable with, but no implementors have felt like doing it yet. :/ ~TJ