W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2002

Re: Tinier SVG

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:24:38 -0500
To: www-svg@w3.org
Message-ID: <r01050400-1021-30B9DEABF7E511D69E4A0003937A08C2@[]>

chris@w3.org (Chris Lilley) writes:
>SSL> My original point was just that SVG Tiny is not particularly tiny,
>Its a lot smaller than Full, and substantially smaller than Basic. But
>the implementations speak for themselves.

Great.  I will listen to those implementations and see if they tell me
anything useful to my projects.  So far, they have not.

>SSL> and there's still a lot of room for something useful but smaller.
>A bit smaller, yes. Lots smaller becomes rapidly not useful or,
>alternatively, discards things like accessibility or

Or animation, or JPEG, or the need for decimal coordinates.

>Of course, it is always possible to make something smaller. For
>example all transformations could be removed (but then, that gives an
>increase in required significant digits for coordinates) or remove all
>path comands except cubic beziers, (tradeoff being more complex
>content generation, larger files and lower quality) or only have the
>polygon command and no path. Or remove all text and just draw pictures
>of the characters.

Why are you still arguing ad absurdio?  I'll come up with a spec that
works for me - I can't say I expect any progress in this forum on this

>I am never surprised when you laugh. Nor did I say W3C was not
>interested in a smaller profile in future (although there is a
>downside to more profiles as well, of course).
>I disagree though with your veiled assertion that SVG Tiny is way too
>big and unimplementable.

"Veiled assertion"?  Come on, Chris.  All you're doing now is seriously
dampening my interest in anything to do with SVG in the future.  I
didn't particularly think that was your job.

>Neither. The TinyLine site mentions two JVMs that have bee used to run

The original question was about the distribution of J2ME devices with
the capability of running the Personal Profile rather than MIDP.  I
don't see how TinyLine's support for PP has anything to do with the
number of devices actually running PP.

Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid: is another possibility altogether
Received on Thursday, 14 November 2002 10:24:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:46:54 UTC