W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > December 2001

Re: SVG>gif>text browser survey for: object vs embed?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 06:58:08 -0500 (EST)
To: jonathan chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
cc: <www-svg@w3.org>, <www-amaya-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0112190655050.32653-100000@tux.w3.org>
Object:
Amaya 5.2 Broken image
iCab 2.6 spinning earth
Opera 5.0b3.393 source XML

embed
Amaya 5.2 circle.svg
iCab2.6 nothing
Opera 5.0b3.393 source XML

All on Mac OS X.1.1, no plugins

cheers

Chaals

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, jonathan chetwynd wrote:

  So far I estimate ~50% successful degradation by browser type, with object
  slightly pulling ahead of embed, and lynx, mozilla and IE6 behaving well,
  running alongside is amaya improving?

  Could I have further contributions particularly for
  apple: ie, nn, icab
  linux: opera, nn6,
  no plugins..
  any others?

  How do we feel these two examples* demonstrate that SVG successfully degrades
  in a range of browsers? Please note possible inadequacies are highlighted in
  capitals.

  *http://www.learningdifficulty.org/develop/examples/objectsvg.html
  embedsvg.html is linked from it.

  Does the code need a tweak? please tell me.

  Does anyone have other examples demonstrating perhaps:
  more complex but successful degradations of SVG?
  allowing users to trigger events via the keyboard as well as the mouse?

  Are we communicating sufficiently well between groups? comments please

  please excuse cross-posting

  thanks





-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2001 06:58:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:21 GMT