W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2001

RE: SVG - A thought

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 07:19:26 -0500 (EST)
To: <maxdunn@siliconpublishing.com>
cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0112200713490.4061-100000@tux.w3.org>
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 maxdunn@siliconpublishing.com wrote:

  To date few if any of the interesting things that have been done with
  SVG have resembled Flash.

CMN on the other hand, many of the interesting things I have seen done with
Flash could easily be done with SVG and be more accessible.

max
  I think for tiny devices a scaled back spec makes sense, but compared to
  the size of typical browsers and operating systems of Today there is
  nothing bloated about Adobe's SVG Viewer on a PC.

  Rather than put a crippled form of SVG in web browsers, perhaps Adobe
  should put a rudimentary XHTML browser/XSLT Processor into their SVG
  Viewer.

The SVG group is working on several profiules, for smaller kinds of devices
that can't hold a full animated SVG viewer (and a static profile was already
defined in SVG 1.0 - Batik is almost completely conformant to that).
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG

On the other side, Jon Ferraiolo, editor of the SVG specification and an
Adobe SVG guy, was one of several SVG implementors who worked on the
production of a document explaining requirements for a component extension
framework, that would allow an SVG plugin to call an XHTML vrowser or XSLT
processor as a plugin for included content. This is going to be more
important as more types of content are used on teh Web - Math, music,
chemical information, etc. http://www.w3.org/TR/cx It is my hope that this
work will progress to a specification, and be implemented, to make the idea a
useful reality.

cheers

Charles
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 07:19:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:59 GMT