RE: [xml-dev] Edd Dumbill on SVG

[Max Dunn <maxdunn@siliconpublishing.com>]

> I pushed the Macromedia folks at WEB 2001 to support 
> SVG (and SMIL).  

Thank you!  Tell them it is the sooner the better... nothing wrong with
Flash, it's just the .SWF part that sucks.  Replace that with SVG - See:

http://www.carto.net/papers/svg/comparison_flash_svg.html

> I'd love to see Microsoft support it.  

They have to.  How could they not?  They support .pcx, Paradox,
WordPerfect from 8 years ago, every proprietary format you can name.  It
would look too suspicious.  

SVG is such an obvious format for vector graphics, it's already a great
format over .swf or whatever *before* taking into account its XML
characteristics.

> Those two hopes may mark me as a ridiculous 
> optimist, but SVG is really cool stuff.

I don't think that's optimistic.  Then again I'm one of those absurd
people that thinks XSLT will be used on the client...

> There's been some concern expressed that SVG is not 
> too far off from XSL-FO (as in Formatting Objects 
> Considered Harmful [1]), but I'm happy to see a 
> solid vector graphics-based presentation language 
> using an XML vocabulary.

[1] - http://www.myopera.com/people/howcome/1999/foch.html

Yes, that's a valid concern (though he notes that over current graphic
formats SVG is a step up), and again it's something that client-side
XSLT can help with.  

Max
http://www.siliconpublishing.org/svg.asp