[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Len Bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
- To: Dave Winer <dave@userland.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 17:34:14 -0600
Dave Winer wrote:
> We've done an evaluation of SVG, and are very very excited about it.
Ummm.... cool, but not killer app. This is the Goldfarb/Chamberlain
paper finally implemented and well done. I like it. OTOH, 2D is a
degenerate
case of 3D so this is on a collision course with X3D. The advantages
appear to be the degree to which it is well-integrated with the common
scripting languages and DOM framework.
X3D is ruled by the original VRML97 abstract design and the ambitions
for that were extravagant. OTOH, it is very powerful considered in
isolation from XML. If X3D pursues the wrapper tag approach, it
may die on the cross of the context-free parse with the nails being
the ugliness of the resulting API and file size. Since this has been
typified as
size of file (X3D files with wrappers get very big) vs speed (the
context free parse is fast), the tradeoffs of the SVG design
and the X3D design are good study objects for XML application
language designers and may be a good test of where we are on
the scale of how small a handler download and content size
have to be to get market penetration.
SVG is not the *revolutionize the web* app being hyped, (WebML a la
OpenGL) but it
is a fine addition to the XML application languages. It will be fun
to use.
len bullard
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/threads.html
***************************************************************************
|
