Network Working Group

Editorial Stream                                                A. Rossi
Internet-Draft
Request for Comments: 9896                  RFC Series Consulting Editor
Obsoletes: 7996 (if approved)                                              N. Brownlee
Intended status:
Category: Informational
Expires: 21 March 2026
ISSN: 2070-1721                                               J. Mahoney
                                                   RFC Production Center
                                                              M. Thomson
                                                       17 September
                                                           November 2025

                              SVGs in RFCs
                   draft-editorial-rswg-svgsinrfcs-04

Abstract

   This document sets policy for the inclusion of SVGs in the definitive
   versions of RFCs and relevant publication formats.  It contains
   policy requirements from RFC 7996 and but removes all requirements
   related to using a specific SVG profile or specific implementation code.  It
   also makes the RFC Publication Center (RPC) responsible for
   implementation decisions regarding SVGs.

About

Status of This Document Memo

   This note document is to be removed before publishing as not an RFC.

   The latest revision of this draft can be found at
   https://github.com/alexisannerossi/id-svgsinrfcs/blob/main/
   svgsinrfcs.md.  Status information Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for this informational purposes.

   This document may be found at
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-editorial-rswg-svgsinrfcs/.

   Discussion is a product of this document takes place on the RSWG Editorial Stream RFC Series Policy Definition
   Process.  It represents the consensus of the RFC Series Working Group mailing list (mailto:rswg@rfc-editor.org), which is
   archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rswg/.

   Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
   https://github.com/alexisannerossi/id-svgsinrfcs.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with
   approved by the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working RFC Series Approval Board.  Such documents are not
   candidates for any level of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list Standard; see Section 2 of RFC
   7841.

   Information about the current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum status of six months this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents obtained at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 21 March 2026.
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9896.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info)
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Policy Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Implementation Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4

1.  Introduction

   This document sets policy for the inclusion of SVGs (Scalable Scalable Vector
   Graphics)
   Graphics (SVGs) in the definitive versions of RFCs and relevant
   publication formats.  It contains policy requirements taken from
   [RFC7996] and but removes all requirements related to using a specific
   SVG profile or
   specific implementation code.

   SVG has been developed by W3C, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C); see
   [SVG].

   The RFC Publication Center (RPC) is responsible for making decisions
   about SVG tooling and implementation decisions.  They implementation.  The RPC may want to use the content of
   [RFC7996] as a starting point for those decisions, but they are not
   bound by [RFC7996] and they [RFC7996].  In addition, the RPC may change elements of the
   implementation as needed to support the RFC authoring community as
   long as those changes are aligned with the policy requirements in
   this document.

2.  Policy Requirements

   Decisions about SVG tooling and implementation decisions are made or overseen
   by the
   RPC, RPC and must adhere to the policy requirements in this document.
   document:

   *  SVGs may be included in RFCs to help explain a concept more
      clearly, but they should not be the only representation of that
      concept.  A good faith good-faith effort should be made to assure ensure that
      descriptions of concepts - -- which might include protocols,
      formats, or system architectures - -- are fully represented in the
      text of the RFC.  At minimum, SVGs should be consistent with the text.
      descriptions in the text of the RFC.

   *  SVGs must not include animation or interactive features.  SVGs
      should include only limited reactive design elements (scaling,
      dark/light mode, and perhaps minor adjustments to allow for
      variations in display technology).  The intent of this is to
      ensure that the diagram's meaning is not altered.

   *  Images and diagrams in RFCs should be successfully rendered and
      understood by the widest audience possible.  To that end, the RPC
      may prohibit the use of SVG features that are known to lack
      support on common devices, that do not render on small or low-
      resolution screens, or that could make diagrams less
      comprehensible for any significant readership.  This includes:

      -  SVGs must not contain pointers to external resources.

      -  SVGs must not contain executable script.

      -  SVGs should be as accessible as possible to people with visual
         disabilities, including those who have color blindness, those
         who need to scale or change fonts, and those who use screen screen-
         reading software.  The RPC will refer to the W3C Accessibility
         Guidelines [WAI] when making decisions regarding accessibility.

   *  Authors may include multiple versions of images or diagrams in
      rfcxml.
      RFCXML.  Publication formats should present the versions best
      suited to each format.  In many cases, that will be an SVG.

   *  SVG vocabulary and implementation may change over time.  Changes
      are not required to remain backwards-compatible, backwards compatible, although
      maintaining compatibility where possible is encouraged.

   The RPC is authorized to place constraints on SVG usage in RFCs for
   both technical and editorial reasons in order to ensure that
   published RFCs meet the above policy and to provide consistency
   across the RFC series. Series.  The RPC must document the acceptable usage of
   SVGs, and all changes to decisions about SVG tooling or and
   implementation decisions must be widely communicated to the RFC author
   community using mailing lists or other means.

3.  Implementation Guidance

   The RPC is expected to solicit community input before making
   decisions and to publicly explain their reasoning.

   Documentation produced by the RPC should describe what the technical and
   editorial constraints that apply to SVGs and provide RFC authors with
   guidance on how to produce diagrams that meet these those constraints.

   The RPC's implementation should strive to allow SVGs produced by
   widely used drawing tools.  Where possible, implementation decisions
   should focus on specifying what is disallowed, disallowed rather than attempting
   to specify exactly what is allowed.

   The RPC should periodically review and revise their practices.

4.  Security Considerations

   This document has no security considerations.

5.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA actions.

6.  Informative References

   [RFC7996]  Brownlee, N., "SVG Drawings for RFCs: SVG 1.2 RFC",
              RFC 7996, DOI 10.17487/RFC7996, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7996>.
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7996>.

   [SVG]      W3C, "Scalable Vector Graphics", n.d., Graphics (SVG) 2",
              <https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/>.

   [WAI]      W3C, "W3C Accessibility Standards Overview", n.d.,
              <https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/>.

Authors' Addresses

   Alexis Rossi
   RFC Series Consulting Editor
   Email: rsce@rfc-editor.org

   Nevil Brownlee
   Email: nevil.brownlee@gmail.com

   Jean Mahoney
   RFC Production Center
   Email: jmahoney@staff.rfc-editor.org

   Martin Thomson
   Email: mt@lowentropy.net