W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2004

Re: SVG 1.2 Comments

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:09:22 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200411100709.iAA79No03641@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: www-svg@w3.org

Scooter Morris <scooter@cgl.ucsf.edu> wrote:

>     graphics with animation and interactivity, /and a set of APIs upon
>     which to build graphics-based applications/. This document specifies

To me, it seems that SVG has become the specification of a product,
basically in the Flash marketplace, rather than a final form graphics
interchange format.  The concentration on the mobile market also 
probably indicates a search for product opportunity.

That seems to represent a move from a sale of tooling based business
model to a sale of clients model.  There clearly is a need for tooling,
though, given the people using the argument that certain features must
be used in the client because the only way of authoring is to code the
SVG and then see what the client does with it.

The requirement for a Windows Metafile equivalent for HTML web pages is
still not being met, so line diagrams for the general public still have
to be done as GIF (and may be done as JPG, because of general ignorance -
people also use bit maps in PDF, for graphs and diagrams!).  The failure
to meet this requirement is a comnbination of educational failings and
commercial vested interests (authors of content rich diagrams aren't
being educated about vector images and support doesn't exist out of 
the box on most PCs).

> list.  I will freely admit that Ian Hixie's unfortunate initial response 

I think, though, that you are agreeing with his general position.
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2004 07:20:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:01 UTC