W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-native-web-apps@w3.org > December 2011

Re: Multiple splash screen dimensions

From: Wesley Hales <whales@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:55:49 -0500
Cc: Brian LeRoux <brianl@adobe.com>, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>, "public-native-web-apps@w3.org" <public-native-web-apps@w3.org>, Brian LeRoux <brian.leroux@nitobi.com>
Message-Id: <C67D4A51-3124-4ED2-B673-ABE2B0E7220E@redhat.com>
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>

On Dec 13, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 13, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Brian LeRoux wrote:
>> drawing back to earlier conversations I'm tempted to say the spec should call for SVG and the implementations should sort out the device target rendering...
> I think that is too much to ask for SVG… I'm a bit out of the design scene, but I think hardly any graphic designers (and the software they use) use SVG. Also, as you pointed out, SVG support on devices is limited and probably suffers from the same drawbacks as drawing HTML (slow to boot a renderer). Image rendering is presumedly much faster because you don't need to build a DOM, set up a scripting env. etc...   

Good points. I'm on the fence. 
We could benchmark drawing SVG vs. downloading a well optimized image but loading a bitmap is technically loading an array of bytes, loading an SVG involves reading, parsing, and issuing the individual drawing commands.
However, SVG is a well supported export format in almost all OSS graphics packages (including Open Office) and all the Adobe CS products have the capability. Support looks pretty good from here (http://caniuse.com/#feat=svg), but I think it comes down to which is faster.
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2011 18:56:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:46:09 UTC