- From: Leonard Rosenthol <leonardr@lazerware.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:22:30 -0400
- To: "Fred P." <fprog26@hotmail.com>, www-svg@w3.org
At 02:39 PM 4/15/2003 -0400, Fred P. wrote: >>tables are certainly not the sort of priority >>where early versions of SVG need it. > >Well, I don't think that including XHTML DTD of table inside SVG 1.2 >could be considered difficult in any sort of way. > >Why making it so difficult to display text and images that scales? It's not the DISPLAY of the text/tables, but the LAYOUT of them! Layout of tables, esp. those that support all of the features of XHTML is quite complex, and that belongs to the XHTML formatter. There is already a way for SVG to "drop out" to other XML renders, which is the correct way to handle this. >One of the advantage of PDF is that you can ZOOM IN and still >see beautiful images and text. Why not having a SVG document >that can do something completely similar ? SVG and PDF are equivalent when it comes to support of text. PDF, like SVG, has no concept of words, lines, paragraphs, tables, etc. It's just a series of drawing instructions about where to place the glyphs on the page. Something earlier in the process (the authoring application) defines where they go - the LAYOUT engine. >Because currently, there's no way around to do it efficiently. >Since there's no concept of a JAR file equivalent, >if you wish to send someone a SVG standalone document >containing few bitmap images, how do you proceed? You can embed bitmaps just fine in SVG using CDATA sections. Adobe Illustrator (and other SVG authoring apps) give you that option. Leonard
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2003 17:22:49 UTC