W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2005

Re: [SVGMobile12] About vector graphics and other specification

From: Jean-Claude Dufourd <jcdufourd@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 11:15:48 +0900
Message-ID: <d51ceba505052119154b34188d@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On 5/22/05, Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr> wrote:
> 
> SVG does not consider itself to own the user agent.


Yes it does. Otherwise, there would be no need of mandating gzip 
compression, PNG and JPEG decoding, a scripting language, etc.
If SVG is embedded in a larger framework (e.g. CDF on the Web, MPEG-2 TS on 
a set-top-box...), the larger framework has its own assumptions and 
requirements. For example, early versions of i-Mode had GIF but no JPG if I 
remember correctly, so SVG reqs for image clash with that. 


Irrespective of
> whether an SVG document is standalone or embedded, it still requires a
> syntax in which to be expressed, otherwise how can one create content
> for it?


Why are you talking about syntax ? I am not saying anything about removing 
syntax reqs. Where did you get that from ?
Of course, syntax for vector graphics items is needed.


I am not trying to represent you as stupid, simply to communicate to you
> what I understand from reading your message so that you would have a
> chance of clarifying your position. You claim that "If [I] reread [your]
> message later, [I] will have to admit that [you] could not possibly mean
> to remove those items in the parentheses, namely 'elements and
> attributes syntax, semantics, rendering model and specific APIs'". I
> have reread your message, and for context the relevant sentence was:
> 
> """
> a vector graphics profile, which could be the current SVGT1.2 profile
> purged of any non vector graphics item (elements and attributes syntax,
> semantics, rendering model and specific APIs)
> """
> 
> In what other way can this be understood? If your proposed profile is
> purged of the items in the parentheses, how can they not be removed?


I admit my sentence is ambiguous, but you display remarkable consistency in 
reading it the worst possible way. Can we please return to the core of the 
matter, leaving the form aside ? Here is an unambiguous (I hope) rephrase:

a vector graphics profile, which could be the current SVGT1.2 profile purged 
of any non vector graphics item. This vector graphics profile would only 
contain elements and attributes syntax, semantics, rendering model and 
specific APIs for vector graphics elements, excluding any clause not 
directly related to vector graphics, i.e. requirements of compression, 
Connection or Timer API, PNG and JPG decoding, scripting language, etc.


Note that I also asked for specific details, which you don't seem to
> wish to provide.
> 

We need to establish a common ground before examples can be discussed, 
otherwise they'll get misrepresented as well.
However, I have already mentioned SVG in CDF, SVG in MPEG-2 TS in a DVBT 
framework, SVG in i-Mode...

Is my comment clear now ?
-- 
Jean-Claude Dufourd
Founder, Chief Scientist, Streamezzo
83 Bd du Montparnasse
75006 Paris, France Tel:+33 1 53 63 28 47
Received on Sunday, 22 May 2005 02:15:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:30 GMT