[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XF orms?)

• To: 'Mike Champion' <mc@x...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XF orms?)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 10:17:14 -0500

Given the Adobe plugin, how the heck 
would they do that?  That's just silly.
If someone wants support SVG, work over 
the guys implementing the client, not the guys who 
provide the hosting browser.

Would SVG work better as a behavior-attached 
HTC or as an encapsulated plugin?  Stuffing 
it into as a HTML wrapped namespaced element set 
is an awful thing to do to an animation 
language.  One thing one learns in graphics 
is that slow rendering kills any interest. 
MS is doing SVG a favor by letting 
the vendor that actually does this well plugin 
and not attempting to work in that market 
directly.  Why build their own plugin at 
this point?  It becomes yetAnotherFreebie.

Do you guys ever sit down and figure out 
the costs of supporting these loss-leader 
formats?

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...]

10/17/2002 10:39:56 AM, "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...> wrote:

>This won't hunt, Paul.  No one is suggesting that MS will 
>torpedo SVG.  

I think the concern is that they will lock out the dockworkers, leaving the
Good Ship SVG to rot in port with its valuable cargo unavailable to the consumers :-)

Sorry, couldn't resist ...

• Prev by Date: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• Next by Date: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
• Previous by thread: Re: New Generation Browsers (Was: XDocs and XForms?)
• Next by thread: RE: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread