Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
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 ...
|
