Lists Home |
Date Index |
bryan rasmussen said:
>>> SVG is XML?
>> "SVG is an application of XML and is compatible with the "Extensible
>> Markup Language (XML) 1.0" Recommendation"
> So what you mean is that SVG is an XML-based standard
>> People continue using old GIFs and JPEGs and other formats as Flash by
>> several motives.
> This is a ridiculous argument in that Flash can also execute code, most
> of the tutorials I've seen the past couple years involving Flash are how
> to use Flash to consume XML and dynamically display data.
Well, in this list was suggested that XML failure to conquer the web was
because very complete XML specs. People continueS using older formats over
XML based ones because several motives, including that XML approaches do
not address all situations of interest.
>> There is also problems related to presentational features of SVG.
>> Whereas font was considered harmfull for the web (the visible one) and
>> eliminated from last (X)HTMLs, MathML, XSL-FO, and SVG follow the
>> contrary way. I find very interesting next
> SVG can use CSS, as can most presentational XML formats. XSL-FO can't,
> which is why I had to make a CSS preprocessor for my XSL-FO
I was not refering to usage of CSS in a SVG file but that SVG _is_
presentational and so harmful as font was. <font> was eliminated from HTML
last specs, there is no reason for repeataing errors of the past with
online spreading of p-MathML, SVG, or XSL-FO.
> Only one event on this chart of the search history of CSS has to do with
> CSS as Cascading Style Sheets. One of the events had to do with a test
> that seems to be used in Pakistan, which might affect two of the top
> cities(I have no way of knowing, but two top cities are in India), the
> last event details a Swiss company which might explain the results from
> top city Zurich. The data is uhm, useless, unless we are trying to
> figure out how many different uses there are for the acronym CSS in the
1) eliminate those examples via the "-" command and look how much the
graphic changes. This can offer you a more accurate idea.
2) The data for the graphic is based in Google engine. Try
to see how many results refer to the w3c spec and how many are noise like
3) The null interest for XSL-FO in browsers, and the decreasing interest
for XSL-FO at printing (with recent increasing in CSS formatters) would
explain part of the lack of popularity and interest in XSL-FO observed on
> Bryan Rasmussen
Center for CANONICAL| SCIENCE)