W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2009

SVG 2.0 (was: Minutes, 12 November 2009 SVG WG telcon)

From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:26:15 -0500
Message-ID: <4AFD5E77.5020003@w3.org>
To: Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@gmail.com>
CC: www-svg@w3.org
Hi, Alexandre-

Alexandre Prokoudine wrote (on 11/13/09 8:04 AM):
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>>  No, SVG Full 1.2 is no longer under development.  The implementation climate
>>  has changed, and some of the features defined for SVG 1.2 (both Full and
>>  Tiny) are not as relevant now as they were at that time.
>>  The SVG WG is taking the best features from SVG 1.2, and new implementation
>>  experience and use cases, and developing SVG 2.0 with the active
>>  participation of browser vendors and collaboration with the CSS, WebApps,
>>  XSL-FO, and HTML WGs (among others, such as the Internationalization and
>>  Accessibility activities).
>>  We are developing SVG 2.0 as a series of modules that can be used to
>>  incrementally expand earlier SVG specifications, or implemented as a
>>  comprehensive specification.
> Thank you, Doug. So e.g. the planned 2.5D transformations spec will
> move to 2.0 as well?


> Is there general agreement at this stage what primary focus of 2.0
> would be, if such could be specified?

The primary focus, as far as I see it, is refining the SVG DOM to be 
more easily implemented and more performant, and adding features that 
make SVG easier to use (syntactic sugar, parameters, canned filter 
effects, that sort of thing), as well as tightening up the language in 
the spec and making more comprehensive tests to get better interoperability.

I'm pretty sure that reflects the general view of the SVG WG, and 
hopefully of the implementers. :)

>I see that most participators
> you mention generally fall into "web" category. How much attention
> could be given to "design" category which is rather omnivore :) and
> deals with both web and print.

There are some things that cater more specifically to print than to Web, 
such as the color management stuff.  Many of the improvements needed 
relate to performance and interactivity, so that's obviously stuff that 
needs to be worked out with the Web browser implementers.

I'm personally less knowledgeable about what other considerations are 
needed for print... can you elaborate?

> And what would be expected from "design" collaborators?

You tell us!  We are open to feedback from designers, and have even 
sought it out, but so far haven't heard enough from them.  If you are 
interested in helping follow though on this, let us know what you have 
in mind.

-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Friday, 13 November 2009 13:26:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:24 UTC