- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 11:14:56 +0100
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Doug Schepers: >But I have heard repeatedly from different browser vendors that until we >start seeing even more use of SVG by content creators, they are unlikely >to prioritize improving SVG support; Knowing the behaviour of 'normal' authors, the argument the other way around works as well - as long as common viewers have so many bugs and gaps many authors say: 'This is not ready to use, we will look at some statistics about bugs and gaps next year, to decide, whether the format is usable or not for authors beyond testing viewer capabilities and creating workarounds for bugs and gaps.' Implementation stagnation therefore only means, that authors will wait for another and yet another year before providing more content. It is not much use for authors to provide content, that is not presented correctly in common viewers. And it would be much more complex for SVG to work around current gaps and bugs of viewers than for example for (X)HTML or even CSS. For example for CSS it was still an option to keep the stylesheet simple for many years to get more or less usable decorations. If a feature in SVG interpretation is missing, the gaphics is simply wrong - and many authors will not publish this at all and some others may provide such hints as 'Use version 9.51 of browser X to see it correctly, don't even try browser U, V, W in any version and no earlier version of X and no X version 10.? due to regressions in these versions.' Because it is predictable, that not all users will use version 9.51 of browser X, the author becomes frustrated and starts to care about other problems/formats ;o) If SVG on the other hand would be simplified only to a subset, that more viewers can interprete correctly, this does not help such authors either, because this does not cover their use case - and again they will start to care about other problems/formats. Olaf
Received on Monday, 9 May 2011 10:15:26 UTC