Re[2]: Gap analysis: SMIL

On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 04:55:11 +0900
Kazuyuki Ashimura <> wrote:

> For example, as I mentioned at the Web-based Signage Workshop in June
> [1], even SCXML could be another "related existing standard" here.
> Also we should concentrate on thinking about "what is actually
> necessary and valuable" as Charles mentioned above rather than
> rejecting any possibilities at least at the gap analysis stage.

Thanks for letting me know about SCXML.
Although SCXML could be a candidate for new-gen SMIL
as you mentioned at the workshop, I think it has lower possibility
to be accepted by signage industry than SMIL.

It seems to be similar to the topic discussed in W3C and
web communities years ago: "XHTML 2 vs. HTML5".
I think SMIL supporters in signage industry would like to
extend SMIL rather than adopting or developing a new language.

Although the doc should include all possibilities as gap analysis,
it must be realistic. I don't think SCXML is realistic for now.
"Realistic" means the possibility that SCXML will be implemented
in web browsers and there are some supporters.
As far as I know, no one in signage industry support SCXML.
So I don't think we need to add SCXML in the doc now.

At least, SMIL is realistic. there are some enthusiastic supporters,
and it has already implemented some web browsers, and we can
use it (maybe animation only) in HTML through inline SVG now.

But I don't deny SCXML completely. If it become realistic
and we believe it is useful for creating signage contents,
then we should consider it.


Newphoria Corporation
Chief Technology Officer
Futomi Hatano

Received on Friday, 7 December 2012 04:15:54 UTC