W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > September 2009

Re: ACTION-924: canvas and SVG draft text / comments

From: Jeff Sonstein <jxsast@rit.edu>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 13:41:13 -0400
Cc: public-bpwg@w3.org
Message-Id: <C8E3E806-C434-4DC8-8470-D1B0349EF419@rit.edu>
To: Eduardo Casais <casays@yahoo.com>
On Sep 3, 2009, at 9:55 AM, Eduardo Casais wrote:

>> I was just asked to write
>> about the question of
>> when to choose Canvas and when to choose SVG
> I am 100% with you on this

feel free to suggest edits to the editor
I won't feel hurt

> However, the proposed text, in its current
> form, does not constitute a best practice in
> this sense. There are several problems with
> it:
> 1) It is rather tautological. Basically, it
> states "use SVG if you need the features of
> SVG, and use canvas if you only need the
> features of canvas".

I *do* try to point out
the basic decision-elements

SVG if you need DOM access and richness
Canvas if you don't

a lot of developers know the canvas tag
but not SVG
I am afraid

> 2) The heading is "Use canvas for dynamic
> graphics". Considering that SVG can do
> everything canvas does, AND has additional
> features for dynamic graphics (animation,
> built-in scaling, dynamic modifications via
> DOM manipulations), AND there are no obvious
> performance counter-indications to SVG, AND
> it is better established than the recent HTML5
> feature, the legitimate question is whether
> the recommendation should not be rather "Use
> SVG for dynamic graphics"?

got a suggestion that puts canvas and SVG in the same heading-phrase?

> 3) At the other extreme, this means canvas is
> merely a 2D-drawing bitmap drawing tool,
> suitable for simpler, graphics with very
> limited dynamics.


> But then the legitimate question becomes "why
> not produce or pre-generate these graphics on
> the application server (with GIF, Flash, etc)
> and then deliver them with the rest of HTTP
> responses?"

the choice of whether to generate stuff
server-side or client-side
seems to me beyond the scope of this little section

I hope this clarifies the scope of the charge I received
and the reasons for what I wrote

feel free to suggest specific modifications to the editors
no problem


"Absurdity, n.: A statement or belief manifestly
  inconsistent with one's own opinion."
-- Ambrose Bierce --

Prof. Jeff Sonstein

Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 17:41:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:54 UTC