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. :/


Reply via email to