Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Ian Hickson wrote:
It also doesn't work that well. I'd be interested to see what happened
in IE if the SVG used the SVG 1.2 <textArea> feature. Or if it used the
SVG <text> and <tSpan> features.
Case in point:
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/12/01/The-White-Pebble
In IE, there's some stray "XHTML HTML" and "XHTML HTML XML" text. This
isn't acceptable to most people. It certainly isn't something that it
would make sense to encourage. The worst possible outcome here would be
for browsers like IE to start trying to parse this "SVG" in text/html,
because the lack of any sensible parsing rules for it would guarentee that
we're faced with even more "tag soup", thus undoing all the work that the
HTML5 spec is trying to do to get us past that.
You are aware that I like to "tweak" IE users, right?
With the current technology, this could have been avoided with a single
div and two lines of CSS. And I am most capable of doing that.
In the longer run, I do believe that an architected simple rule like:
xmlns attributes are invalid on HTML elements except html, and
when found on unrecognized attributes imply style="display:none"
unless you recognize the value of this attribute.
... would channel those with insane desires to make extensions into
doing so in a manner that is harmless. Such a rule might take a year or
two to get widely deployed, but the worst feet-draggers won't be
affected any worse than they were in the days when <table> was young.
- Sam Ruby
