- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 20:24:04 +0200
- To: "Dailey, David P." <david.dailey@sru.edu>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Mar 23, 2007, at 05:19, Dailey, David P. wrote: > 1. SVG - there just has to be a way for HTML and SVG to coexist in > the > same document space without nasty problems. HTML and VML coexist quite > happily (albeit in one browser only). Not understanding all the gears > and torque and hydrodynamics, our inability to sprinkle SVG into HTML > inline consistently across browsers, seems rather silly to me. In the WHATWG context, there has been interest in adding SVG and MathML to text/html. http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/11/24/Feedback-on-XHTML http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/12/05/HOWTO-Embed-MathML-and- SVG-into-HTML4 Personally, I think the parsing algorithm should be amended to put subtrees rooted at <svg> and <math> into the SVG and MathML namespaces, respectively. > 5. SMIL is a good technology http://annevankesteren.nl/2006/03/smil > 6. Much of the specification of WHATWG's <canvas> is redundant with > and syntactically inconsistent with SVG. <canvas> provides a drawing API that is backed by running code in shipping products. SVG is for serializing vector graphics. > 7. If <canvas> is entangled in a patent, as it seems to be, my > unlawyerly reading of the W3C patent statement > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Licensing > <http://rockmail.sru.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http:// > www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/%23sec-Licensing> > suggests that the W3C cannot approve it, if an alternative royalty > free technology exists. Apple's statement said, translated to non-lawyer English, that they wouldn't become a problem if this WG adopts <canvas>. Please re-read Apple's statement. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 23 March 2007 18:24:06 UTC