Re: Support for Vector Images

David Norris (kg9ae@geocities.com)
Tue, 25 Nov 1997 12:35:19 -0500


From: "David Norris" <kg9ae@geocities.com>
To: <www-html@w3.org>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 12:35:19 -0500
Message-ID: <01bcf9c8$804963c0$3c009696@kg9ae.dyn.ml.org>
Subject: Re: Support for Vector Images

Microsoft has vector graphics support implemented in Internet Explorer 4.
The image is created as an object and has a parameter that contains vector
information.  I believe they included a Windows Metafile converter in the MS
Internet SDK 4.  I never really looked into it.  It seems like a good idea
to provide some level of vector support in HTML or a closely related
standard.  Simple illustrations would greatly benefit from this.  And, it
should scale to more complex graphics well.

,David Norris
World Wide Web - http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1652/
My Home's Web - http://kg9ae.dyn.ml.org/
ICQ Universal Internet Number - 412039
E-Mail - kg9ae@geocities.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Braden N. McDaniel <braden@shadow.net>
To: 'Andrew n marshall' <amarshal@usc.edu>; www-html@w3.org
<www-html@w3.org>
Cc: www-style@w3.org <www-style@w3.org>
Date: Tuesday, November 25, 1997 1:07 AM
Subject: RE: Support for Vector Images


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-style-request@w3.org [SMTP:www-style-request@w3.org]On Behalf
> Of Andrew n marshall
> Sent: Monday, November 24, 1997 10:58 PM
> To: 'www-html@w3.org'
> Cc: 'www-style@w3.org'
> Subject: Support for Vector Images
>
>
>
> I would greatly appreciate the W3C to include a recommendation for
> vector-based images for HTML.  Personally I would prefer this to be a
> monochromatic format that could be rendered in the foreground color (great
> opportunity for scripts!!).  EPS files come to mind as a quick and easy
> solution to this problem, although I'm not an expert in the pros and cons
> of image formats.
>
> The other request that goes along side this is vector-based clipping
paths.
>  I know this is a nasty request, and I also realize it is specific to the
> visual rendering, especially text flows.  I honestly don't expect anything
> out of this.  Perhaps there is a better place for this in CSS.

I think CGM is the obvious choice--largely because it is an ISO standard. Is
it the *best* choice? I don't know; but being free from ownership by any
particular company  is certainly a big plus.

I believe there has been intermittent grumbling about the lack of support
for CGM in Web browsers for some time now. Would a formal plea from the W3C
help things? I don't know, but I'm inclined to doubt it.

Braden