Re: svg plug-ins? No!!!

Hi,

Not that I'm a pro or anything, but if an SVG plug in were available to
older browsers, wouldn't it be helpful in getting it a good user base? 77%
of current internet users apparently have the flash plug in (macromedia's
people said so in a recent seminar round here), and I think there is already
a lot of competition from others in the race to get standard vector graphics
on the web. I wouldn't like our beautiful SVG to be a forgotten standard in
the www scrapyard(like VRML maybe), or even slow to pick up like png...
Maybe having a plug in wouldn't mean a lack of native support in newer
browsers?

I'm trying to see the new draft btw, and it's very slow. Is this a w3c
problem?

Thanks,

Alejandro

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Gould <gould@inf.uji.es>
To: www-svg@w3.org <www-svg@w3.org>
Date: Wednesday, April 14, 1999 10:21 AM
Subject: svg plug-ins? No!!!


>Dear Chris and rest of the list:
>
>An Infoworld article, just out
>
>http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?/features/990412multimedia
.
>htm
>
>talks about multimedia graphics and states the following:
>
>"This summer, the Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) format should be
finalized,
>which will deliver a standard way to deliver interactive Web content using
>rich fonts, better typographic controls, and vector graphics through text
>files.
>
>The format will require an SVG-specific plug-in to be installed and is
being
>backed by major Web companies, including both Microsoft and Netscape."
>
>....
>
>Tell me this isn't so!!! Tell me they just don't get it.
>
>One of the reasons Antonio (www.imapper.com) and I are so gung-ho about
>serving maps as SVG is precisely to remove the plug-in from the picture.
>
>The goal continues to be native suport (MIME), right?
>
>Comments (reassuring ones)?
>
>Mike
>___________________________________
> Michael Gould
> Departamento de Informatica
> Universitat Jaume I
> E-12071 Castellon (Valencia) Spain
> Tel. +34 964 72 83 17
> http://www.lander.es/~mgould/
> Nuevo No. móvil:  656 43 88 59
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 14 April 1999 05:25:06 UTC