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

RE: SVG 1.2 Comments

From: Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:21:32 -0500
To: <www-svg@w3c.org>
Cc: "'Scooter Morris'" <scooter@cgl.ucsf.edu>
Message-Id: <20041110092131.725D013D838@sack.dreamhost.com>

Hi, Scooter-

For my part, I'd like to mention that many of us who were responding
(myself, for example) are not in any way affiliated with the WG. We're just
opinionated people who are invested in the direction that SVG is going. 

I think that throughout those threads, both sides were often talking past
one another, and there was probably a good bit of mounting frustration.
However, Dean and Jon's emails were especially good, I thought, at trying to
look at the larger picture toward a resolution, and I think that Thomas
DeWeese most eloquently conveyed the general tone of my own perspective,
from a technical standpoint.

All that being said, I think that Ian's comments raised (and will continue
to raise) a lot of good issues, and I think the SVG 1.2 spec will be much
stronger for it. I think it would be a shame if you refrained from
commenting, especially since you're an implementor.

Please don't interpret that to mean that I agree with you, though. :)
Obviously, I'm one of the people that the SVG1.2 Spec, non-graphics aspects
and all, is aimed at.

Regards-
Doug 


Scooter Morris wrote:
| 
| Here are some comments that I have been working on in 
| response to the SVG 1.2 last call.  I've been really trying 
| to read all of the comments and discussion in www-svg, and I 
| frankly have been less and less comfortable about adding my 
| comments to the mix.  Why?  Well, for two reasons, mainly.  I 
| seem to represent a very minor focus of the SVG 
| specification, someone who is attempting to add some SVG 
| functionality to an existing web browser, and I'm probably 
| the least knowledgeable of the folks working on SVG in 
| Mozilla.  Second, and perhaps more salient, is my confusion 
| of the tone and WG response to comments made in the list.  I 
| will freely admit that Ian Hixie's unfortunate initial 
| response (throw the whole thing out and start over) did not 
| set a really positive tone, the increasing animosity in the 
| list makes me wonder whether the working group really wants 
| comments, or at least comments from folks such as me, who 
| have a very strong need for SVG+MathML+XHTML+Javascript in a 
| browser that scientists are willing to use every day.  Note, 
| this is not an accusation, this is a perception. 
| 
| 
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2004 09:21:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:52 UTC