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

Re: Declarative animation limitations

From: <AndrewWatt2001@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 10:38:13 EST
Message-ID: <bf.29e8989e.2b0911e5@aol.com>
To: ksmrq@netscape.net, www-svg@w3.org
In a message dated 17/11/2002 14:15:09 GMT Standard Time, ksmrq@netscape.net 
writes:


> Thanks for taking the time to examine the issue.

You're welcome Ken. I took time to look at it primarily because I found your 
comments genuinely interesting. Although I wasn't immediately sure why you 
seemed so frustrated. :)

Personally, I would be keen to see additional declarative animation features 
added to SVG 1.2 or 2.0 (or both).

I haven't had time yet to read through the SVG 1.2 Working Draft but, as I 
recall, the SVG 1.1/1.2/2.0 Requirements document indicated that additional 
declarative animation would, at a minimum, be explored. So if you want to see 
more features added then pitch in with specific positive ideas.

So have you had a look at those documents to see what is in the pipeline?


> The fact that the time controls are so elaborate that I was able to create 
> such a kludge, yet the value controls are so primitive I had to, is bad 
> design. I would never design and have never used an animation system that 
> denied me the ability to control the smoothness of my interpolants. To me 
> that's Animation 101.

As I understand the history this arises partly (mostly?) because SVG decided 
to use the SMIL Animation approach. I can see why time-based issues would 
therefore be up front - at least in SVG 1.0.

Again if you haven't already done so take a look at the SMIL Animation 
Recommendation and think about how, practically, we can make progress from 
there.

I am not making those suggestions to be patronising. I simply don't know who 
you are and/or what aspects of SVG you may or may not already be familiar 
with.

> I know my way around computer animation and the mathematics of curves far 
> better than most users, yet I found the construction of a workaround 
> challenging. To me it seems obvious the need for a simple smooth 
> interpolation facility exists. I cannot imagine the typical graphic artist 
> finding my method. In fact, I rather doubt many graphics programmers would.
> 

Again speaking personally, I would be interested to see your frustration 
translated into specific positive proposals about what declarative animation 
facilities should be added to SVG - whether in SVG 1.2, 2.0 or whatever.

I am not totally clear exactly what you want and I am, at least so I am told, 
am keener about or more familiar with declarative animation than many who 
come from a JavaScript orientated background. SVG is bringing people together 
from a diverse range of backgrounds so we can put our different skills / 
perspectives into the pot. And, hopefully, the next version of SVG will be 
even better. :)


> I'll be happy to answer further questions. Or just tell me declarative 
> animation is not meant to be taken seriously and I'll go away quietly.

Well, it's up to the SVG WG to answer that one <grin/> but speaking 
personally I would be keen to learn more about the background you are 
bringing to this and about specifically what you would like to propose.

If you know of other approaches to declarative animation that you believe 
that SVG can learn from then that too would likely be of interest to many.

Go slowly, and explain the "obvious" - at least what *seems* obvious to you. 
:) For those of us with different backgrounds things that are obvious to you 
may be totally impenetrable to us! :)

Regards

Andrew Watt
Received on Sunday, 17 November 2002 10:38:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:23 GMT