Styleable Selects will be massive. These selection libraries out there are quite heavy. Homebrewed ones never seem to work with keyboard. To have these be accessible out the gate will help so much.
Same with Safari. This HTML the author is speaking about isn’t really in the actual HTML standard yet, rather “some browser’s HTML” which I find a bit… neglectful.
Off topic, but I recently encountered a weirdness in HTML and this seems like a thread where someone might understand why:
I have an SVG image that contains some JPEG images referenced via the SVG image attribute. Browsers display it fine. If I reference it via an HTML img tag, the SVG vector images display fine, but the raster files are not loaded (no errors in the debugging tools, they just don’t get loaded). If I reference it via an HTML object tag, the browser displays them correctly.
This is not a browser bug. Chrome, Firefox, and Safari all have the same behaviour, so I presume this is actually specified and intentional behaviour, I just have no idea why this would be what people want.
There is a difference between SVG being rendered as a document amd SVG rendered as an image. Sadly, I don’t know there that line is drawn and what is and isn’t supposed to be included in documents vs images. A typical example that I am aware of is JavaScript. Embedding something via shouldn’t allow scripts.
JavaScript is disabled.
External resources (e.g. images, stylesheets) cannot be loaded, though they can be used if inlined through data: URLs.
:visited-link styles aren’t rendered.
Platform-native widget styling (based on OS theme) is disabled.
Couldn’t find a link to the proper specification text though. The one on MDN seems wrong. :-(
I assume a good chunk of the why is “we started it that way and didnt see a reason to try change it”, but images are in HTML pretty much defined to be things that can be fetched in one request and then displayed in one go, there is no room made for them to cause subsequent requests (which could cause layout shifts etc further down the line).
I am not sure how that would apply. The .jpeg and .svg files are in the same directory on the web server and that is a subdirectory of the directory containing the HTML.
The fix here (if you need to work with the img tag) is to preprocess the SVG to bake the images into it by changing their hrefs to data: URLs. They don’t count as “external resources” in that case.
Styleable Selects will be massive. These selection libraries out there are quite heavy. Homebrewed ones never seem to work with keyboard. To have these be accessible out the gate will help so much.
A good few of these demos don’t work on Firefox (yet).
Same with Safari. This HTML the author is speaking about isn’t really in the actual HTML standard yet, rather “some browser’s HTML” which I find a bit… neglectful.
Off topic, but I recently encountered a weirdness in HTML and this seems like a thread where someone might understand why:
I have an SVG image that contains some JPEG images referenced via the SVG image attribute. Browsers display it fine. If I reference it via an HTML img tag, the SVG vector images display fine, but the raster files are not loaded (no errors in the debugging tools, they just don’t get loaded). If I reference it via an HTML object tag, the browser displays them correctly.
This is not a browser bug. Chrome, Firefox, and Safari all have the same behaviour, so I presume this is actually specified and intentional behaviour, I just have no idea why this would be what people want.
There is a difference between SVG being rendered as a document amd SVG rendered as an image. Sadly, I don’t know there that line is drawn and what is and isn’t supposed to be included in documents vs images. A typical example that I am aware of is JavaScript. Embedding something via shouldn’t allow scripts.
Can you upload a test case somewhere?
MDN is reasonably clear.
That’s a great description indeed. To quote:
Couldn’t find a link to the proper specification text though. The one on MDN seems wrong. :-(
I assume a good chunk of the why is “we started it that way and didnt see a reason to try change it”, but images are in HTML pretty much defined to be things that can be fetched in one request and then displayed in one go, there is no room made for them to cause subsequent requests (which could cause layout shifts etc further down the line).
[Comment removed by author]
I am not sure how that would apply. The .jpeg and .svg files are in the same directory on the web server and that is a subdirectory of the directory containing the HTML.
The fix here (if you need to work with the img tag) is to preprocess the SVG to bake the images into it by changing their
hrefs todata:URLs. They don’t count as “external resources” in that case.