- From: Dailey, David P. <david.dailey@sru.edu>
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:58:08 -0400
- To: SVG IG List <public-svg-ig@w3.org>
This example is probably about six years old... http://srufaculty.sru.edu/david.dailey/svg/newstuff/reflectedgradient.svg It is one of the very old animations I did before SMIL became available in Opera. Why would one not use SMIL after all? Here's how it looks in five different browsers: http://srufaculty.sru.edu/david.dailey/svg/newstuff/AcidGradient11a.jpg I think this is properly handled by FF and IE/ASV. I think Opera is not anti-aliasing the strange bits in the out-of-bounds area, and perhaps the spec doesn't say that it has to, but that doesn't mean the spec is right, as the example clearly indicates! I am rather troubled to hear that some of the Microsoft folks are saying they don't need to implement SMIL since "even the SVG Working Group doesn't like it" (my paraphrase not theirs). SMIL is exactly half of the reason SVG is good, so I hope folks don't forget that is one of the ideological centers of the whole ball of wax. Animation is probably undervalued as a communication tool, since historically one has needed programmers to create it. I think the troubles people on the WG sometimes seem to have in agreeing on what the spec should say is due to the fact that not everyone has yet implemented SMIL. SMIL is the only easy way to understand certain implications of the spec: in particular, by animating the relevant parts. Implement SMIL and then it will all be clear! Feeling polemic today David
Received on Friday, 26 March 2010 19:59:19 UTC