W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > April 2007

Re: SVG and proper XML design

From: Oliver Hunt <oliver@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:58:54 -0700
Message-Id: <BFD821E8-67AF-4985-BFB0-55330B157640@apple.com>
To: www-svg@w3.org

I had an earlier response which seems to have been lost in the ether,  
however most of the points i mentioned have
been covered in earlier response (By both Chris and David)
On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:37 AM, Chris Lilley wrote:
<snip>

> So your point is well made, except for your "unecessarily  
> compressed" and "meaningless savings in space". In real world  
> usage, these are far from meaningless and far from unnecessary.
>

Additionally there are time efficiency concerns outside of data  
transfer.  No matter how fast your XML parser is it will still be  
slower (due to recursion, memory usage, simple I/O) than the parser  
for SVG paths, it's an unfortunate, but nonetheless important fact.   
For simple paths this isn't a problem, but if you start looking at  
(for example) the SVG maps at http://www.carto.net/papers/svg/ 
samples/ the paths get very large - so parsing speed becomes a  
consideration.
<more snipping>

>
> BD>  But as I got more involved, I discovered that
> BD> SVG is not as easy to handle as other XML languages, and  
> required a
> BD> lot of extra unnecessary work.
>
> Extra work, agreed. unnecessary work, no.
>
Not necessarily extra work -- managing the construction (and repaint  
issues) of more elements is non trivial, anyway you can parse the  
path syntax in a (relatively) simple iterative loop.

--Oliver


>
>
>
> -- 
>  Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
>  Interaction Domain Leader
>  Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
>  W3C Graphics Activity Lead
>  Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2007 00:48:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:36 GMT