• To: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Subject: Re: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
• From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>
• Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 18:05:03 +0000
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3E298D43.9010709@p...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EEEACE28@h...> <p04330101ba4e231a7873@[192.168.254.4]> <3E298D43.9010709@p...>

On Saturday 18 January 2003 5:22 pm, Paul Prescod wrote:

> In my opinion, Flash serves as a demonstration of the limitations of
> proprietary formats. Less then 10% of the data on the Web the _should
> be_ vector graphics _are_ vector graphics and the same goes for
> animations. The concept of "animated GIF" is pretty bizarre and yet
> amazingly popular: because to date the alternative has been Flash with
> all of its proprietary binary badness. I'm expecting SVG to change that
> situation.

As opposed to GIF's *open binary goodness* :-)

ABS

-- 
Oh, pilot of the storm who leaves no trace, Like thoughts inside a dream
Heed the path that led me to that place, Yellow desert screen

• References:
  • RE: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more patent fun
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Some thoughts on 'direct access' to XML (long)
• Next by Date: RE: Some thoughts on 'direct access' to XML (long)
• Previous by thread: Re: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
• Next by thread: Re: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread