Does it mean unusably inconvenient? Because that's what I call having to embed SVGs just so CSS works with them.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/ob...
Would you expect a parent's CSS to affect HTML in an iframe, a separate document context? That would be confusing behavior to be sure. Side effects galore.
The use case for styling external SVGs with CSS is waaay more obvious. We should at least have the option to do it, even if it isn't enabled by default.
* font rendering issues
* rendering improvements
* accessibility
* ease of authoring
* can be animated
https://github.blog/2016-02-22-delivering-octicons-with-svg/....
For all intents and purposes with regard to web development, fonts have been monochromatic (except for emojis). Any with sufficient knowledge gathered over decades can write/edit an SVG in the editor of their choice, graphical or textual.
How does one edit their own color font? Can you do it in a text editor? Do most font editing programs support it? Or were you speaking of fonts purely as a consumer rather than a producer?
Guess what “DOM integration” means.
> SVG is so bad people have been using fonts instead
Icon fonts have been out of fashion for so long I almost suspect you time traveled from the past.