24 replies

1. Zach Leatherman 1 min later

   “It's one SVG, Michael — what could it cost, $10?”

   1. Zach Leatherman 4 min later

      The episode of Arrested Development from which this quote originates aired in November, 2003 — and $10 in 2003 is roughly the same as $17 in 2025.

      1. Jason Garber 13 min later

         @zachleat give the new administration a minute; we’ll get there

         1. Zach Leatherman 15 min later

            @jgarber oh no

      2. Amelia Bellamy-Royds 2 hr later

         @zachleat As I was looking at grocery inflation on the Canadian Consumer Price Index just a moment ago, and since I know from my own shopping trips that bananas are one of the few items that haven't gone up wildly in price lately, I had to check if they had a "bananas" price index, and they do, so for reference:

         Bananas bought in Canada are about 35% more expensive today than in November 2003. (Still much less than $10: 79 or 89¢/lb.)

         I couldn't find a price category for favicons or SVG. 😏

         1. Zach Leatherman 2 days later

            @AmeliaBR I only buy bananas from banana republic, if that helps

            1. Amelia Bellamy-Royds 2 days later

               @zachleat Oh, well, if they're *designer* bananas, then maybe that's why they're $10.

               (Also, belated apologies for totally braindumping on your joke thread. My other Masto server was down briefly, so I had this deep dive into grocery inflation with chart screenshots all queued up & couldn't post it, then I flip over here & you're joking about food inflation, & hyperfocused brain was all "wow, have I got a chart for you!" 🍌🙃🍌)

   2. Marty Party 6 min later

      @zachleat Safari aren't caving anytime soon by the looks of it.

      1. Zach Leatherman 15 min later

         @martycoote boooooooooo

   3. Dave 🧱 15 min later

      @zachleat “Take a look at web banner, Michael!”

2. Private reply 3 min later
   1. Private reply 4 min later
3. Zach Leatherman 2 hr later

   what is apple’s beef with SVG https://fediverse.zachleat.com/@zachleat/113114654283999351

   1. Amelia Bellamy-Royds 2 hr later

      @zachleat They don't like that it requires a full DOM model to render an image.

      @litherum was tasked for a while with coming up with a standardized subset of SVG that could be rendered much more efficiently with fewer potential security leaks. But that project stalled when all SVG standards work did, and he's doing unrelated stuff now, so not sure if any change in SVG support is likely.

      For icons, I still think they could render the image once when the web page is open & cache as a PNG.

      1. mb21 12 hr later

         @AmeliaBR @zachleat @litherum Interesting. I’m sure they could make it work. Like: even Finder/Preview support rendering SVGs, but yeah, it’s comparatively heavy.

         Going by how images are handled elsewhere in the ecosystem (iOS homescreen icons, app store previews, retina handling of all those), I’m sure Apple would also prefer developers to upload different hand-optimized images for the various resolutions they require.

         1. mb21 12 hr later

            @AmeliaBR @zachleat @litherum If Apple can make developers work more for even the tiniest improvement in end-user UI, they’ll always make that choice.

            Not saying I always agree with the tradeoff. But if you want to understand Apple, you need to understand that.

            1. mb21 February 28, 2025

               @AmeliaBR @zachleat @litherum Oh, there is progress on svg favicons in safari! https://bsky.app/profile/jensimmons.bsky.social/post/3ljb77vytl22v

      2. Zach Leatherman 2 days later

         @AmeliaBR @litherum strict mode for SVG would be great! They’re already sandboxed a bit on the browser though, right? <img> versus <svg> directly versus <object> all allow different things

         1. Amelia Bellamy-Royds 2 days later

            @zachleat Yes, SVG-as-image is sandboxed (no script or references to external files) but in browsers it still uses the full web rendering engine, just with those features blocked.

            The goal with the "SVG Native" subset was to be able to create SVG renderers that didn't need a full web engine & its security/sandboxing model. The graphics would be a more direct equivalent to Android "drawable" vector graphics.

            Use cases & overview in the draft spec:
            https://svgwg.org/specs/svg-native/

            1. Zach Leatherman 2 days later

               @AmeliaBR oh fascinating — super interested to read the CSS support crossover 👀

               1. Amelia Bellamy-Royds 2 days later

                  @zachleat The idea was that "SVG Native" graphics would use CSS-compatible presentation attributes, but very limited CSS features. However, CSS variables would be allowed because of their use for palette theming in SVG-in-OpenType fonts (which were supposed to be an important use case for the standardized restricted SVG rendering environment).

                  Given how fast CSS has been adding new features, that section would probably need to be re-written as an allow-list instead of a block-list, though.

4. Paweł Grzybek 9 hr later

   @zachleat I see that someone is reviewing <head /> line by line today.

   Yeah, one of my biggest dreams is to standardise the way how we do favicons. It is such a mess, and ever new project I look for “favicon in 2025 best practices”.

5. Antoine 22 hr later

   @zachleat

   Still waiting for animated SVG favicon !
   (working only in Firefox afaik)

   1. Zach Leatherman 2 days later

      @villapirorum truly we will have ascended to a higher plane when that is possible