- From: Thierry Kormann <Thierry.Kormann@sophia.inria.fr>
- Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 14:12:24 +0100
- To: Kas Thomas <kt@acroforms.com>
- cc: www-svg@w3.org
Kas, > I would like to second that notion and vote for a return to a simplified > SVG that lots of big AND small companies can implement. If only Adobe can > implement this thing, then it will be seen as an Adobe technology. What do you mean by small companies ? We (the Koala team) are currently implementing a static svg viewer. Only two developers are involved. The result is not yet as rich as the Adobe plugin but we are already able to render some of the svg documents available in the svg specification. Of course, a "light" version of svg could help small companies but the actual svg spec is not impossible to implement. The question is just "what king of svg implementation do you required ?". > It seems essential to leverage off of CSS and DOM to the maximum extent > possible, and to have an XML grammar for vector graphics that follows the > "spirit of XML" to the max extent possible, as opposed to following some > blind alley that supposedly leads to compact files. The stylable svg is well designed and can be implemented by small teams. The exchange svg has no real purpose to exist in my opinion. I'm still waiting for concrete arguments about that spec (except those which only consider the CSS syntax instead of the XML syntax). Thierry. -- Thierry Kormann email: Thierry.Kormann@sophia.inria.fr http://www.inria.fr/koala/tkormann/ Koala/Dyade/Bull @ INRIA - Sophia Antipolis
Received on Thursday, 9 March 2000 08:13:12 UTC