W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2012

Re: SVG 2 FPWD published (animateColor)

From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:08:55 +0200
To: www-svg@w3.org
Message-Id: <201208301308.55166.Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Robert Longson:

>Because it's pointless and makes viewers more complicated for no reason.

I cannot see what is pointless about animating colors ...
This seems to be more a philosophical question, what makes sense at 
all. Therefore recommendations are pretty fine, you have not to reflect
about philosophical issues, you simply can implement what is recommended ;o)

>Only authors that can't be bothered to change animateColor to animate
>need to do that.
>A simple search and replace script would fix things for them.

I see, you agree to what I mentioned already, such viewers waste 
the time and resources of authors and users.
Users cannot be sure, that documents are changed to the will of a few 
Mozilla-programmers and authors might not really want to spend time again 
to change documents, that worked already for many years and for all 
previous viewers they tested sucessfully, that do already, 
what is recommended in the SVG  version, that is used for the document 
(even if removed in a future version, that does not change the existence 
in documents following SVG 1.1 or SVG tiny 1.2).
And the Mozilla-programmers do not have access to all these documents 
to change them to camouflage such bugs or gaps of their viewer.

Such a depreciation discussion has only the tendency, that other new
implementors may draw the same wrong conclusion and a once
reliable feature will get untrustworthy without any need. Finally
many authors will get or keep the impression, that SVG is still not
ready for use for the next 10 or 20 years, because viewers do not
manage to implement what is already recommended for 10 or more
years ...

Olaf
Received on Thursday, 30 August 2012 11:09:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:52 GMT