RE: acid test stuff

Hi Patrick,

	My quote was meant to be in jest, sorry if it was taken
any other way. We Aussies don't mince our words as sweetly as
some foreigners;=)

	In any case, I am a big fan of you guys coming on board
to build SVG in IE - we have been waiting years for this.

	However more seriously: I totally agree that authoring
tool-chains that exploit the SMIL capabilities in SVG are
basically non-existent. This has been a huge failing with SVG
in general.

	The true reality is that the majority of web content
will be generated by graphic artists, not geeks using emacs,
vi or Visual Studio. And so, no tools means no (significant)
content will be created.

	_But_ as long as it is on your road-map then all is
well with the world, suffice to say there is a lot of content
in both the mobile space, and the STB space that requires
animation to work. SVG as a technology covers more than just
a browser, and I fully expect you guys to eventually set the
benchmark for all others to aspire to. But to do so, animation
is essential - heck in the Tiny test suite there are something
like 88 animation tests out of 500 or so tests, so at
best you can only get approx 80% pass rate without animation
and how would that look...

	I guess it would be nice if someone would come along
with an IE plugin that does animation and works with decent
performance to fill the gap until IE9 hits the streets!

	Keep up the good work.

Alex

--Original Message--:
>"I am rather troubled to hear that some of the Microsoft folks are saying they don't need to implement SMIL"
>
>"Did they really say that? Then I'd go so far as to say they are idiots."
>
>We never said we didn't need to implement SMIL.  What we said is that SMIL is a big implementation, and like other browsers, it is not going to make it in IE9 (our first SVG implementation).  I did say that there are many ways to animate.  There is SMIL, there are libraries that support SMIL in absence of the implementation, there is jscript; and there are two areas we need to investigate in CSS: transitions and transformations.
>
>My statement was that SMIL is not tool supported, and we want to reconcile all of these with HTML5.  This is what we have touched on in the working group.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Patrick Dengler
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: public-svg-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-svg-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Alex Danilo
>Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 2:55 PM
>To: Dailey, David P.
>Cc: SVG IG List
>Subject: Re: acid test stuff
>
>Hi David,
>
>	Nice test!
>
>--Original Message--:
>>This example is probably about six years old...
>>
>>http://srufaculty.sru.edu/david.dailey/svg/newstuff/reflectedgradient.s
>>vg
>>
>><snip/>
>>
>>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.
>><snip/>
>
>Did they really say that? Then I'd go so far as to say they are idiots.
>
>The entire basis of declarative animation is one of the most powerful features in SVG.
>
>We are doing stuff that would be nearly impossible with scripting, but trivial with declarative animation.
>
>Also, IE 5.5 I think first introduced HTML+SMIL and it's a pretty good SMIL implementation too. So if they don't do it for SVG it simply reflects their immaturity in graphics:-) (Oh, and a great example of code non-reuse).
>
>Alex
>
>>
>>Feeling polemic today
>>David
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Monday, 29 March 2010 23:50:47 UTC