An SVG is all you need | slacker news

Downsides of using SVG:

- cannot wrap text

- cannot embed font glyphs - your SVG might be unreadable if the user doesn't have the font installed. You can convert letters to curves, but then you won't be able to select and edit text. It's such an obvious problem, yet nobody thought of it, how? Photoshop solved this long time ago - it saves both text and its rendering, so the text can always be rendered.

- browsers do not publish, which version and features they support

- may contain Javascript and references to external resources, which makes it difficult to view in a secure, isolated environment

One of solutions is having two SVGs: author version, which you edit in Inkscape and which uses Inkscape-specific extensions, and published version, which is generated from the first, that uses only basic features and has text converted to curves.

plenty of other problems

- They often render differently in different browsers and other renderers. It's very frustrating to get consistent results (like a PDF). In complex diagrams I'd say it's basically impossible

- Renderers that are fast usually lack many features

- Nobody other than the browser seems to actually have all the features?

- You can link an SVG within an SVG (to make a lightweight composite image). But if you have two levels of indirection then all renderers I've tried will refuse to render the SVG

- Inkscape is basically the only good editor on Linux and it easily runs out of memory and crashes for complex images

- Complex SVGs eat all your RAM in Chromium (only marginally better in Firefox)

- Basic things like arrows from Inkscape will not render anywhere else

I still use SVGs all the time, b/c there are no good alternatives, but it's a crappy standard and I try to keep all my images/diagrams extremely simple