[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Saturday 13 April 2002 18:12, AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 13/04/02 13:08:18 GMT Daylight Time, robin@knowscape.com
> writes:
> > Wrong answer. SVG is hard to implement, it's only 7 months since the REC,
> > but
> > we already have *10* viewers for various platforms, at various levels of
> > development.
>
> Can you translate "10" viewers at "various stages of development" into a
> number of viewers that actually work now?
>
> If all 10 viewers come to fruition then that's great. But I don't think it
> serves the cause of SVG or the cause of accuracy to paint the current
> situation the way you do.
Adobe SVG Viewer is in very good shape, as are Batik and the CSIRO viewers.
Mozilla and X-Smiles aren't doing bad either. Amaya has some support, though
it's admittedly limited. KDE's SVG support is looking very good, and should
be quite complete -- if not totally complete -- soon. That's more than two,
doesn't take into account some viewers that I haven't tested, or internal
projects that aren't public yet (and I know first hand that there are some).
It also doesn't take into account WebDraw or SodiPodi (and whatever the
latest KDE vector tool is nowadays) which aren't players but editors.
It also doesn't take into account exports from major software and converters.
And server-side toolkits.
I stand by my opinion. For something as recent and as difficult to implement
properly, SVG is doing rather good implementation-wise. This doesn't mean
that we can't do with ever more implementations, but it certainly shows the
good health of the area.
--
_______________________________________________________________________
Robin Berjon <robin@knowscape.com> -- CTO
k n o w s c a p e : // venture knowledge agency www.knowscape.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
After the appearance and demonstrated superiority of tabbed browsing,
it becomes clear that what we need is more tabbed drinking.
|
