Andreas, where are the facts that demonstrate the popularity of the SVG1.1 spec that you are referring to?
I'm referring to a spec that helps the average joe on the street to author. presumably you know of ms paint, did you perhaps visit http:// www.isketch.org by these standards the SVG1.1 spec is extremely bloated. Where is the authoring tool that anyone can just pick up and use? say comparable with the many text editors or tuxpaint? and it's not just that the developers got carried away with feature bloat, it's that accessibility got buried at the same time. you fail to mention the accessibility issues. there still isn't any accessibility software such as a screen reader that operates with any SVG viewer. After how many years? keyboard navigation is being bolted on as an after-thought, in part because I filed bugs and pester regularly audio wasn't included, and yet macromedia's flash took off... you've found a particular niche, but be aware it isn't the only one, games frequently rely on sound as do films and animation. take a look at tuxpaint to hear how sound can be integrated into the authoring environment, to literally make music as you draw. there are many other accessibility issues and it's not at all clear how these will be resolved so very late in the day.... regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 6 Feb 2007, at 20:23, Andreas Neumann wrote: > It has to be admitted the SVG1.1 spec is imho far too bloated and > basic accessibility isn't included > later specs are even more bloated, and I much prefer RAD and the > microformat conceptually. Thats a very general statement that isn't really supported by facts. I don't think its bloated. It might be bloated for certain specific use cases, but for other use cases it definitely isn't bloated. I can't really say that any SVG 1.1 feature is useless. If you can, which one would you choose to abandon? I am sure many people would object. As to later specs: The SVG WG would have prefered to outsource certain features to other W3C WGs/specs, but at the time SVG 1.2 was designed there was nothing around that would fit the needs. It is certainly true that certain features in SVG 1.2 would be better standardized outside the scope of SVG, but someone has to take the lead and do the work. Over time, this will happen anyway. > having said which, the inkscape interface is extremely busy. > commercial applications develop bloat, because developers like it and > it ties users into buying upgrades. > > however many people, and children in particular prefer simpler > interfaces such as "paint" or isketch.org. But that's another target audience. I agree that children prefer other user interfaces, but the inkscape folks are probably not targetting kids. > in 2004 after discussions with bryce: [ 1081266 ] Child friendly > version? (OLPC?) > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php? > func=detail&aid=1081266&group_id=93438&atid=604309 > > since 2006 the concept has been superceded or overtaken by web2.0 and > the user as author. > this could for instance include annotation, labelling and more in a > game-like experience. > > it would betray a confidence to describe the requirements further. that can and should be done for a different target audience and maybe as a different product, or a fork of the product. Andreas ----- To unsubscribe send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -or- visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers and click "edit my membership" ---- Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
