W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2009

Re: Required support for SVG in widgets

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 15:22:26 -0800
Message-ID: <63df84f0902031522k6735c078g37d7b6bbaaf8c3ba@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, public-webapps@w3.org

Is there a reason to require any formats? In very few places we do
this. For example the HTML and CSS specs don't require support for
JPEG, GIF or PNG. Neither HTML or SVG require support for javascript.

Is there a reason for the widget spec to be different?

/ Jonas

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Marcos Caceres
<marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Robin,
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm sorry if this was discussed earlier, but I have no recollection of it
>> being brought up and I can't seem to dig up a reference to this issue from
>> the archives of the public lists of this WG or its previous incarnations.
>> Then again, I have a pretty poor memory and am not so good with computers.
>>
>> Is there any specific reason not to require SVG support in widgets? The
>> draft has everything defined in terms of how it would work, but has it
>> optional both for icons and for the start page. Given the implementations
>> that we're likely to see, I doubt that there would be any problem getting
>> out of CR with SVG being required, even on mobile devices. Making it
>> required has all the usual advantages of reassuring authors that they can
>> indeed use it.
>>
>> If there is no overarching concern with requiring SVG (or if there was when
>> the spec was started, but it's now gone) I would kindly urge the working
>> group to require SVG and add an index.svg default start file.
>
> Ok, I've added SVG as a default start file type to the editor's draft
> (I'll commit it to CVS later today). However, as this is a significant
> addition, the Working Group will have to reach a resolution on this
> (or raise objections here, ASAP).
>
> If WebApps agrees (which I'm confident sure they will), could we ask
> in return that someone from the SVG WG do a review of the Widget P&C
> spec to make sure that all the right bits are in place to make SVG
> work. We are currently in the middle of responding to LC comments, so
> we would ask that the SVG review is done in the Second Last Call
> period (one month from now).
>
> Kind regards,
> Marcos
>
> --
> Marcos Caceres
> http://datadriven.com.au
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2009 23:23:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:29 GMT