- From: Greg Houston <gregory.houston@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 22:40:52 -0600
> Wouldn't it make more sense just to use SVG? Dynamic interactive charts and graphs seem to fall into the gray area between what is more appropriate for canvas or SVG. "<canvas> is designed for creating images dynamically in scripts. SVG focuses on pre-computed image documents, and is more complex and slower to generate dynamically." So canvas is tuned more for creating dynamic charts and graphs whereas SVG is better apt for static sprites and interface elements with the bonus that it "can automatically detect interaction". WHATWG SVG and Canvas Comparison: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/SVG_and_canvas My second idea of being able to add canvas shapes directly to the DOM may be too much. Though since canvas "renders onto a fixed-resolution bitmap" and is basically a flat image, giving the canvas element the usemap and ismap properties doesn't seem like it would be a big issue. Browser agents could probably use pretty much the exact same code for both the img and canvas tag where image maps are concerned. The benefit would be being able to add hot spots for links and tooltips to canvas drawings. It seems silly that something as dynamic as the canvas element would have less interactivity than the img element. Greg
Received on Monday, 3 March 2008 20:40:52 UTC