OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

This won't hunt, Paul.  No one is suggesting that MS will 
torpedo SVG.  You want to redirect the topic away from 
the one that disturbs you:  MS and yes, all of us, have 
options.  Standards have to survive on their merits. SVG 
is an example of a standard with merit, but even it's more 
powerful implementor, Adobe, is lackluster and exercises 
options over when to develop and what to develop.  Adobe 
gets to choose SVG's future today.  MS isn't bothering 
and has the option to ignore or replace.  So does everyone 
out there.  When Adobe chose to ignore VRML and use 
proprietary formats, did you protest that?  No.  That 
was your choice.  Options.

The issue was XForms and XDocs:

1.  We don't quite know what XDocs is.  Mike sent a query 
that seemed to suggest that XDocs is an XForms killer. We 
simply don't know if that is true or even important.

2.  XDocs may be superior to XForms.  Again, we don't know, 
but don't tell me not to take a superior technical option 
because of its origin or because a weaker "standard" might 
exist.  If you are suggesting that, you have forgotten or 
just don't know what a standard should be.  XForms is a 
spec.  XDocs is a technology.  Neither are standard yet.

3.  If the market decides, let running code be the test. 
Otherwise, perceptions poison the web.  

But until we see XDocs, it is all perceptions based 
on speculation.   The question with merit right now 
is what is the client.  I think it time for developers 
to begin to look for alternatives to the web browser.

1.  The browser platform is locked in.  That makes 
it MS's decision and even an MSThrall has to admit 
that isn't healthy.

2.  The HTML browser is slow and quirky for some kinds 
of technology.  Database forms is one of them.  Maybe 
there should be options.

2.  Innovations don't come from one source.  If the 
libraries are powerful, we may get more innovation than 
if the lockin constrains us.  Between patents and lockins 
and fear of the W3C and loathing of the successful, 
the web is stagnant.  Time for fresh thinking not standards.
Standards cut both ways.  If you want the kind of web 
development we had five to ten years ago, we will have 
to break some existing rules.  One of them just might 
be that the browser, the universal interface, is not the 
only viable platform.

Change takes more than standards; it takes guts. Maybe 
developers need more of those and fewer documents that 
tell them where the fences are when in fact, the fences 
are faux.


-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul@prescod.net]

AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:
> Paul,
> In this sector I suggest that, in practice, Microsoft can do pretty much what 
> it likes. They do have an option to develop a new vector graphics standard, 
> whether they call it VML2 or something else.

I think you are wrong. Microsoft has ALWAYS WON by keeping developers 
happy. Developers love SVG. Developers would HATE some proprietary hack 
that competes with a relatively established W3C standard. Microsoft 
doesn't go around trying to piss off developers. Microsoft also has 
recurring and ongoing legal troubles. Deliberately and obviously 
torpedoing industry standards is a good way to exacerbate them. 
Microsoft's corporate customers also will not like it if they perceive 
Microsoft as playing dirty pool. Overall, perception counts.


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS