- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 23:52:34 +0200
- To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
* Robin Berjon wrote: >Your logic is flawed. You either assume the user is in front of the >animation throughout, or anything goes since we have no data to back >anything up. For all we know, 99% of users watch animations seven >times in a row — you're pulling out a probability function out of >thin air. The <discard> element removes an element from the document tree when the discard element begins. Per the current draft, the discard element would begin as soon as possible by default. The default applies if the begin attribute is not specified, or specified but set to an unsupported value like begin="02:00" (the element begins after 2 minutes; SVG Tiny 1.2 does not support this syntax, but SVG "Full" 1.2 will, for all we know). I argued that authors would not expect this behavior as, if they would want to have the element discarded as soon as possible, the user is not going to see much, if anything, of the discarded element, and it would be wiser to not include the element to be discarded in the first place, and, considering the feature is meant for long running animations, that authors are likely to specify the begin time in something but seconds as will be allowed in SVG "Full" 1.2, which would cause the element to be discarded too early. Users are more likely to watch the beginning of the animation, and increasingly less likely to watch later parts of it. The current default would cause the content to appear broken for more users. You argued, against the last point, that authors who care would simply use times specified in seconds to avoid this problem. I think that SVG Tiny 1.2 should be designed so content is available to more users, even if authors do not care that much about compatibility. Against the former point the Working Group argued it is more important that user agents can discard elements as much as possible to save memory, and that this is more important than language design easily understandable by authors. As I disagree that authors want the elements discarded before users can see the content, the current default is likely to have the opposite effect of what the Working Group intends, authors are less likely to notice that they have included superfluous content and corresponding discard elements in their documents. In conclusion, my logic does not appear to be flawed at all, and so I continue to object to the Working Group's response. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Saturday, 22 July 2006 21:52:52 UTC