W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2000

RE: Structure and Accessibility versus SVG

From: Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 19:32:44 +0100
Message-ID: <81E4A2BC03CED111845100104B62AFB58246A8@stagecoach.bts.co.uk>
To: www-svg@w3.org
> From:	tobi [SMTP:ucyur@yahoo.com]
> 
> since this all works well together, why replace HTML
> with SVG?
	[DJW:]  
	Have a look at http://www.dantobias.com/webtips/intro.html
	then note that most commercial web authors are
	presentationalists, not structuralists.  In practice, this
	means that they don't use HTML because of any belief in the
	philosophy behind it, but because, by using HTML, they can
	achieve an approximation of their intended graphic design
	on common desk top PCs without the need for the user to
	explicitly install any software.

	However, because they are actually relying on implementation
	choices which are outside the scope of HTML (although I
	think many believe they are specified), this doesn't produce
	pixel perfect rendition.  By going to something closer to
	a page description language, if it is pre-installed in future
	internet connected PCs, they can more precisely control
	the visual appearance of their page.

	HTML with style sheets could almost achieve the same effect, but
	style sheet implementation is patchy, wherease the initial 
	implementation of SVG is likely to produce a reasonably 
	predictable layout.

	(I wish I could find the web page which contrasts the industry
	defintion of an HTML designer with a plain language one!)
Received on Friday, 26 May 2000 14:39:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 5 November 2012 23:52:47 GMT