- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:41:55 +0100
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: Craig Northway <craign@cisra.canon.com.au>, www-svg@w3.org
On Wednesday, November 24, 2004, 7:46:17 AM, Bjoern wrote: BH> * Craig Northway wrote: >>I agree with some of your earlier comments regarding the more complex >>effects. I raised some objections with the working group. As Jon has >>already mentioned, all proposed effects were included in the last call >>draft, but pending comments from the community may get dropped. BH> Well, that does not make much sense process-wise, Working Groups are BH> supposed to get this right before last call, after last call they can BH> only get dropped when identifying the features as at risk in the call BH> for implementations and abusing that to look how many features survive BH> is quite a bad practise. They can't be dropped between LC and CR, that BH> would require another last call draft. I suspect that is exactly what Craig means, that some features which turn out to be too expensive can get dropped following CR feedback. The basic vector effects architecture is sound, clean, and extensible; but some operations in particular union and intersection may be too costly and might be at risk. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2004 11:41:56 UTC