- From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:34:58 -0500
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Lachlan, On Jul 30, 2007, at 10:50 AM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > Karl Dubost wrote: >> A few SVG examples taken in the wild and related for the use cases >> "is canvas elements really needed?" > > Canvas and SVG and complimentary, not competing. While there is > some overlap in what can be achieved with them, bitmap and vector > graphics can co-exist and are optimised for different situations. > > This article contains a table comparing the trade-offs between > canvas and SVG. > > http://csimms.botonomy.com/2006/02/12/svg-vs-canvas-tastes-great-or- > less-filling/ The distinction between SVG and CANVAS is not really one of vector versus bitmap graphics. Both SVG and CANVAS can handle either. Also, the table you link to doesn't show that SVG cannot handle bitmap graphics so much as that implementations of SVG have not yet implemented those parts of SVG. If anything that article shows that these are competing technologies, and that SVG makes everything easier. I'm not saying that, but the table certainly does. Take care, Rob
Received on Monday, 30 July 2007 18:44:37 UTC