Re: opacity, animate and mask

~:'' ありがとうございました。 wrote:
> regarding "The SVG WG has discussed this very issue at length..." who on 
> the working group has a learning disability or represents the needs and 
> abilities of people other than expert authors?

There is a big problem in dumbing down complex technology, which is, for 
example, demonstrated by Windows, when seen by developers.  If you make 
something appear to do simple things easily, it can become difficult to 
impossible to do more complex things with it, and you can end up with 
lots of arbitrary rules to learn, because they are there to anticipate 
the naive users' behaviour.

For what is essentially an on the wire format, the solution is not to 
dumb down SVG, but to provide dumbed down tools optimised for doing 
certain sorts of applications, and which produce SVG as output.  You 
still have a big problem of course in that you have to convert that into 
someone's perception of wealth.  For companies that amounts to finding a 
way that they can make more money out of that project than something 
they consider eaier/lower risk.  For private individuals, that may 
involve a warm fuzzy feeling in doing it, but the number of people who 
think that way and have the time and skills may be rather limited.

Windows gets away with it because the average managing director uses the 
simple features directly, and is therefore seduced by the apparent 
simplicity.  I'm not sure that the average MD would use even a dumbed 
down SVG personally.

David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.

Received on Sunday, 5 August 2007 09:39:24 UTC