- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 19:08:47 +0200
- To: www-svg@w3.org
Tab Atkins Jr.: > > I said "browsers", not "viewers". I don't care very much about the > community of viewers, as their userbase is infinitesimal compared to > the userbase of browsers. This is a pretty standard treatment; for > example, non-browser implementations of CSS have very little influence > on CSS specifications. (Not zero, but very small.) > What do you call a browser and what a viewer - what is the difference for you, if both provide a visual presentation of a document like SVG or (X)HTML? And if Opera is a viewer for you and not a browser, give examples for programs you call browser and not viewer... For example text browsers like w3m or Lynx usually provide some visual presentation as well. > Since you cannot use <svg:video> or <svg:audio> on the web, it's not > very relevant for us to worry about. I will formally object to any > attempt to specify those elements in SVG2, as the WG is actively > attempting to unify the handful of same-name elements we currently > have with HTML, and adding more makes this much harder. Adding > <audio> and <video> in particular would be terrible, as their APIs and > processing models are substantially different from HTML's. > > ~TJ This seems to be more a compatibility problem of the HTML5 drafts, that reinvented the wheel once more here. audio and video in SVG are mainly reused from SMIL - unfortunately this was incomplete for the audio element, but this could be fixed in SVG 2. Basically the 'deunification' happened in HTML5, not in SVG tiny 1.2. I think, when this came up, the SMIL/SYMM WG offered help to the HTML5 working group to get it right, but unfortunately this was somehow ignored and no we have these HTML5 drafts with an incompatible model, problematic for SVG. But because HTML5 is still only a draft, no official recommendation, anybody should already use for official, serious publications, it should be no problem to fix this inconvenient issue right now in the HTML5 drafts without problems and suffer for authors, before some HTML5 draft comes close to something like a recommendation, as SMIL 1/2/3 and SVG tiny 1.2 already are ;o) Olaf
Received on Thursday, 19 June 2014 17:09:18 UTC