[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Joshua Allen wrote:
> ... The lack of viewers which are hosted in the web browser should
> not be seen as lack of capability, but simply lack of volition in the
> absence of any compelling reason to hook the viewers up (so long as
> Adobe ships a sufficient viewer)
I think that you and I have very different use cases for SVG. I'm not
looking for a vector graphic rendering platform. It's cool for that and
was designed for that, but I just don't have problems that require that.
I'm looking for a dynamic, graphical rendering platform. For that I need
the full suite of specifications implemented in the Adobe viewer: SVG,
JavaScript (built-in implementation), XLink, SMIL, DOM events, etc. Many
people are building apps on this "dSVG" platform and most only run on
the Adobe implementation. As a random example:
* http://herzog.juergen.bei.t-online.de/svg/index.html
Does that run anywhere other than in ASV?
Furthermore, I need them in a browser for the reasons described here:
http://www.blogstream.com/pauls/1034787029
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/svgdomcsharp/ is one nice project.
> KDE also has support. In other words, it is obviously possible for
> independent developers to build good-quality SVG implementations which
> are useful. In fact I would say that the existence of such
> implementations is a key measure of how successful SVG is. If SVG
> requires one or two big Gorilla benefactors to keep it alive, I would
> claim it is a failure and never should have been standardized.
Implementing "dSVG" is in fact a pretty big task -- it is on the order
of difficulty of building a dHTML renderer and how many people have done
that? Of course nowadays "Gorilla" does not mean corporation. It could
also be a team of open source programmers. But so far Adobe is the only
show in town for this profile of SVG.
Paul Prescod
|
