On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 22:07:17 +0100
Appears to be based on:

* http://codepen.io/AmeliaBR/post/me-and-svg

* http://tavmjong.free.fr/svg2_status.html

Having read both the preceding, it looks to me like the project to
define version 2 simply failed, probably because they bit off more than
they could chew. Or perhaps more than browser makers were willing to
implement at one time.

I'm not in a position to know about the SVG2 spec project, but
sometimes when a specification fails, it's for the best. Sometimes a
bunch of people get together and frenzy themselves into including or
providing hooks for every conceivable situation, and that usually
results in complexity, which results in bugs, instability and
incompatibility.

The second of the articles mentioned the browser makers are ready,
willing and able to implement an SVG2 with problem fixes and a few
specific features. I'd hardly call that "life support." At this point
I'm not sure who is left to tear out the stuff that's objected to: It
would be horribly difficult to work all those months on a spec you love
only to be told to rip it out, but if somebody can rip out the unwanted
part of the spec, SVG progresses, though more slowly. I'd imagine the
ripped out stuff gets put in a new document, some of which will someday
become SVG3.

Like I say, my knowlege of the situation is based on the two links
quoted in this thread,  but it doesn't seem as dire as "life support"
to me, nor does it seem like an excuse for radically changing Inkscape,
which works quite well right now, producing and rendering standard SVG
files.