Re: [Tools-discuss] [rfc-i] What do do about SVG

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 13 May 2021 04:24 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC663A24B9 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 May 2021 21:24:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zAoO_A_DwDGj for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 May 2021 21:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x632.google.com (mail-pl1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55CBD3A24B5 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 May 2021 21:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x632.google.com with SMTP id h7so13726315plt.1 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 May 2021 21:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:from:to:references:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bYWpmObxrwQpsAmWX/GGwD3/afLQQi+De8Mv1z7AcDE=; b=RF8wrSLTgPRL/CDZbuXNBKibNHKfbehQ+qrCmJbeqxG15q84zuObUESSLx2jPYsb/3 I1SkrocbTH+quSdobSAh9rPln6TFPDBvrCUrPXsTYlwkNqUQFbtM32JM7uGEdUIBnzeD 6/okimkz5JG9kJH81RxQziETjQ+9LPgAcoLwr02h1Adl5RmQwd97u9Kwr9zWBbkxVDf9 Nk6WWnHb4IhWhUV/zoDPAaSG8k+uxWX9XaHizJTPXAqhZQD7ZE/E3yGl9ogv2xrNVv23 wlEOM1vfGRc1aeW8ClWu/YF3M/hX00Ez12x+FhTsCF5yoS0l3mjGzhrX9i9fXuWYje0Z QUGA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:from:to:references:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bYWpmObxrwQpsAmWX/GGwD3/afLQQi+De8Mv1z7AcDE=; b=UxmVG6e1CAjXmAzWmGcfysvs+/KGXoK4l6N4m2HTWrAodnf6u+82O+9fZICpVJAJAT /QfBn4NrckDhZa7lunSIc7iHjk8wdC9VLyD9Omt1JKXUITTqKcQRg/di4cQvrEK/d0O0 bLOnp5dNswtU7ITSSSFe3ShxWOWleTSbjH6tRoMLHKZBtcjA+IlJOOITiS00sMU4a6Pn maZkWPAjMSGlBVF1um8cPeLdRMGe0+FFogtkEezNrf86dTfdHWdVRRYF+dGYYfIRKDCg qug6c+KADansS5rb/qZCGC8xzD6W2DTadIHdkzVPx+YpoINlU1CvNSpjt2pFzuPfrpBa CSaA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531wTVKR3fax4M4n7u7QSIBhEGO3hLZTqR7pmhKoUcCyAE5XGc7R sxL7PEr2u2lBTH8wZHnpNSRttJ7sAlJ6bg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwJ8XNj5ScnB7TQRz8qPWAHf2LaUfjT7KKfMQ3wWjLZj69u97gS0sXXi71Gaw4Qz/qPDdPUKw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:aa46:b029:ef:8a47:ca53 with SMTP id c6-20020a170902aa46b02900ef8a47ca53mr4987234plr.74.1620879856343; Wed, 12 May 2021 21:24:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:100d:901:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:100d:901:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x9sm1015655pfd.66.2021.05.12.21.24.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 May 2021 21:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Tools Team Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>, RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
References: <f564019-d8b1-76c2-2768-c135d834dc32@iecc.com> <763b8195-6139-fb20-aa4e-2b4d89b5681c@gmail.com> <75d1b100-e761-e9bb-2ae0-02266c86b499@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <6BDFA0EA-D6F1-4443-B771-9B1A0AD56713@tzi.org> <c6dc75da-0b88-bc68-39fe-17887411b97f@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <550c00a4-171d-bf12-b1f5-51dcc639359c@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 16:24:11 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c6dc75da-0b88-bc68-39fe-17887411b97f@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/tk61u06p1zvA33nPBD3CUgA4Abg>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] [rfc-i] What do do about SVG
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 04:24:22 -0000

Hi,

After some investigation, I've understood that this particular problem 
is because svgcheck doesn't allow <style> as a child of <svg>. Nor, after
some experiments, as a child of <path>, even though the RelaxNG in
RFC7996 appears to allow it. (Also, when <style> defines a color, and
I patch svgcheck/word_properties.py to allow <style>, svgcheck doesn't
seem to detect the color elements inside <style>.)

In the course of this I found another instance of a particular
bug in svgcheck (failure to increment errorCount).

So we have the facts that
(a) svgcheck is buggy;
(b) it doesn't implement the RelaxNG in RFC7996;
(c) sadly, we lost the maintainer of the code;
(d) our subset of TinySVG is very hard to generate with most drawing tools;
(e) experience shows that special SVG mangling programs are needed to prepare files for inclusion in RFCs;
(f) we've been told that TinySVG is no longer alive at W3C;
(g) browsers appear to be fully competent at interpreting full SVG.

How can we make progress on resolving this?

Regards
   Brian Carpenter
On 11-May-21 09:21, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> And this is only the latest issue. I believe from my own experiments
> (which included patching the code of svgcheck, writing a supplementary
> SVG massager, and manual SVG editing) that what we have simply isn't fit
> for purpose. And I'm not happy about waiting for the politics of the
> RFC Series Editor to be settled before we discuss what to do about
> this.
> 
> [If somebody could send me the original SVG, I'd be interested to run
> it through my patched tools.]
> 
> Regards
>    Brian Carpenter
> 
> On 11-May-21 04:44, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>> Since this little gem didn’t seem to make it to rfc-interest, here’s a copy…
>> (No action needed, I solved the problem in a different way in kramdown-rfc 1.4.11.)
>> [I had to scale down the crisp original images for this list…]
>>
>> Grüße, Carsten
>>
>>
>> On 2021-01-06, at 05:21, Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp <mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>> wrote:
>>>
>>> clean SVG
>>
>> Before svgcheck:
>>
>>
>> After svgcheck:
>>
>>
>> Much cleaner.  SCNR.
>>
>> Grüße, Carsten
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________________________________
>> Tools-discuss mailing list - Tools-discuss@ietf.org
>> This list is for discussion, not for action requests or bug reports.
>> * Report datatracker and mailarchive bugs to: datatracker-project@ietf.org
>> * Report tools.ietf.org bugs to: webmaster@tools.ietf.org
>> * Report all other bugs or issues to: ietf-action@ietf.org
>> List info (including how to Unsubscribe): https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss
>>
>