Hi All, I guess it's a sore spot. Since I asked the original question, I'll put in my last 2 cents.
I've more than a 1,000 hours invested in a commercial tool which relies heavily on SVG (and it's in alpha). It is all built with open standards tech. It works (though not identically in all browsers and not at all in Safari). If I worked in academia or government that would be then end of it - I could just dictate, "if you want to use it then do this, if not too bad". But really, in my circumstances, it's too bad for me. I would, of course, like something users trust, works reliably in different browser/OS combinations and is robust. I would like to stay with SVG because of my investment, because it is open standard, etc. At this point, SVG is like early HTML - you have to code for different browsers and limit your functionality, but it does fabulous things. If it were maturing driven by user demand and killer apps, that would be just fine. But I have this nagging feeling I need to be prepared in case it is eaten by Godzilla. This is a relevant concern and question for many people who work with SVG, hence my post here. It can even reasonably be considered a technical issue with SVG. If you are riding a horse and it croaks under you, that is a technical failure. Yes, I hoped to elicit a more thorough and calm response describing the limits of functionality of Silverlight by way of comparison. And even some insight into the market and why SVG is here to stay (particularly in IE). But, you get what you get. Some rats row, some rats flee the ship, some rats pretend everything is okay. I hope it is. If it weren't for the abandonment of ASV, I would certainly think so. Given a decent chance, open standards tools have proven themselves. But without ongoing development in IE 6/7, which is 3/4 of the market, then there is undoubted concern. For better or worse, I have to make my software work for Joe and Sally who use the internet for web-surfing and shopping. Not for CS students and Linux geeks. Thank you all, Stephen On 5/26/07, Doug Schepers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, Geoffrey- > > I think you may have felt a little stung by comments on this list, but > as I said, I have no intention of "kicking you off the list". You are > welcome to your opinion. Questions or answers to SVG technical issues > are welcome here: irrelevant boosting of Silverlight is not. > > Geoffrey Swenson wrote: > > SVG is probably a dead duck. I have not wanted to invest any more work > in it > > for more than a year. This is not to say that I dislike SVG much at all, > but > > the Adobe plugin has a lot of problems, and SVG is nowhere near as > > universally available as Silverlight already is. I gave up when the new > > Mozilla stuff was barely functional, and Opera was even worse. Since IE > no > > longer handles SVG, you can continue banging your head on the wall, or > just > > make the pragmatic decision and go with Silverlight. > > IE never did handle SVG, of course... the Adobe viewer did. And the > Renesis player (and others) are closing the gap. SVG is alive and kicking. > > You've made it clear that you don't think much of the Firefox or Opera > implementations, but I think you're wrong. Both are good, and both are > improving. > > > Silverlight has hit the ground running hard. It isn't going to do the > > members of this group any good to put their heads in the ground and hope > > that it will go away and that SVG will somehow rise from its longtime > > sickbed. > > On the contrary. SVG has never been more widely supported, and that > support is improving. And I think it does do the members of this group > --and the Web in general-- good to support open standards, though you > may not understand the benefits (or the dangers of the proprietary > formats). > > > Microsoft has spent their millions developing Silverlight, and it shows. > > > You're right, they have... which is (again) why I don't think they need > any more advertising on this list. > > > It is relevant to the more honest and/or pragmatic members of this > group, > > who are going to have to decide how to migrate their code to something > that is > > going to be more widely available than SVG. > > There may be people who feel the need to, and as I said, I'm sympathetic > to that market need... but it's neither impragmatic nor dishonest to > show integrity in your choice of technology. The truth is, SVG is > getting stronger by the day, and your opinion does nothing to change that. > > > I could hardly care less about whether it is open-sourced or not. > > I said nothing about open source. It's open standards that are > important. Open standards allow for cross-browser, cross-platform, > *multi-company* interoperability. > > > I just > > don't see how volunteer efforts can find a revenue stream to keep up > with > > proprietary code. > > Firefox seems to have presented a good model to prove you wrong. But > you're confusing open source with open standards. Open standards (HTML, > etc.) made the Web what it is today, when all the proprietary formats > (as championed by AOL, CompuServe, etc.) tried to keep a stranglehold on > their own little Web territories. > > > I just want a platform for my ideas, and I will pay for > > good tools. > > Yes, just as I said: I think the main challenge is the tools. > > > Just the rendering speed of Silverlight is something really exciting. > > Ordinary mortals can code really fast complex graphics without having to > > deal with low level graphic details. If SVG could do this (and had a > > well-financed patron behind it) nobody would even care about > Silverlight. > > I agree that rendering speed is something that most SVG implementations > could use help on, and they are working on it. As for a well-financed > patron... well, again, I think you're dancing with the devil when you > want one company to rule a technology. > > > I am not a lurking Microsoft person, though I have worked there as a > > somewhat resentful permatemp a couple of times. I am perfectly aware > that > > Microsoft doesn't always play so nice. > > And yet... > > > But Silverlight really is kewl. I am honestly very excited about it and > I > > will leave it at that. > > Great. I expect not to hear any more from you about it on this list, > thanks. > > Regards- > -Doug > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ----- 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/
