Re: Required support for SVG in widgets

On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 15:42:08 +0100, Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai@us.ibm.com>  
wrote:

> The Web Apps WG should create yet another (short) widget spec, which  
> would be an Open Web profile spec that simply provides a checklist for
> two interoperability levels for conformance. In both profiles, the user
> agent would be required to implement all of the various Widgets spec. One
> interoperability profile would require support for the vague notion of
> "HTML" (defacto standard HTML, not XHTML) and the other profile would
> require support for SVG Tiny 1.2. Both profiles should mandate OMTP  
> BONDI.

Err, why exactly should this group mandate a spec that has so far been  
developed in secret among a consortium of pay-to-play members? It might  
make sense for BONDI to be submitted here, and I hope that it is as good  
as it will need to be, but I don't see any reason to simply take it on  
trust that it is perfect when we haven't even seen it.

> To me, such a spec would help promote open, interoperability technologies
> in the widget space. This spec could be on a delayed timeline (i.e.
> approved after the other widget specs)...
> but just having drafts out there would show the community what the  
> interoperability target is.

Yes, it makes sense in practice to say what kind of baselines are  
generally supported (I don't know that this needs to be a recommendation -  
it would make a fairly useful note just as a rough table).

Doing this as an occasionaly working group note would mean it is quite  
easy process wise, and that might be the best approach.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com