- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 14:37:39 +0100
- To: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
Jim Ley wrote: > I welcome profiling, but would still like to see an > application/svg+xml - I don't make SVG images, I make SVG > applications, and I'd like to ensure they end up with a viewer capable > of rendering them. If I read what you're saying correctly you'd like to have a way to tell more or less the intent of an SVG document (application-orientated or image-orientated) based on the mime type? There's overhead in that (defining new file extensions, updating servers, etc), and even more about defining proper profiles in the spec (as opposed to defining them in the Shiny Donkey Consortium) instead of just advertising feature strings (and thus indirectly conformance levels). Doing such work would require a solid set of use cases. As nice as it is, I'm not entirely buying the multiple SVG viewers with different capabilities one. > Alternatively I'd like to see RCC > etc. reformulated so it will simply degrade to valid static content > showing the same information in SVG 1.1 user agents - at the moment > that degrade path is onerous. That is certainly a worthy goal, but do you have a plan for that? -- Robin Berjon
Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2004 08:38:20 UTC