Re: SVG 2 review request

Hey, folks–

For reference, here's an earlier thread that David might be talking about:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2015Mar/0121.html

Nothing conclusive, but it may be worth considering, before completely 
dismissing the notion of interactive content in <img>.

I'd like to hear a more concrete explanation of why interactivity in 
<img> must be disallowed.

Regards–
Doug

On 8/12/16 7:54 PM, David Dailey wrote:
> This is not at all consistent with previous discussions here.
>
> D
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Tab Atkins Jr.
> [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 5:58 PM
> To: David Dailey Cc: Amelia Bellamy-Royds; Rich Morin;
> [email protected]; Nikos Andronikos; www-svg Subject: Re: SVG 2
> review request
>
> Diversion, but...
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:33 PM, David Dailey
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think the Working Group’s willingness to consider interactivity
>> in SVG inside HTML <img> [reference to previous discussions on
>> listserv]
>
> Uh, this will never happen. Interactive SVG is already easily
> possible in HTML via <iframe> or <object>.  <img> already has a
> decently-defined processing model that eliminates any possibility of
> interactivity.
>
> ~TJ
>
>
>