• To: AndrewWatt2000@a..., xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 07:20:38 -0700
• References: <19d.a6023bb.2adfccb1@a...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

AndrewWatt2000@a... wrote:
>...
> 
> Paul,
> 
> In this sector I suggest that, in practice, Microsoft can do pretty much what 
> it likes. They do have an option to develop a new vector graphics standard, 
> whether they call it VML2 or something else.

I think you are wrong. Microsoft has ALWAYS WON by keeping developers 
happy. Developers love SVG. Developers would HATE some proprietary hack 
that competes with a relatively established W3C standard. Microsoft 
doesn't go around trying to [expletive deleted] off developers. Microsoft also has 
recurring and ongoing legal troubles. Deliberately and obviously 
torpedoing industry standards is a good way to exacerbate them. 
Microsoft's corporate customers also will not like it if they perceive 
Microsoft as playing dirty pool. Overall, perception counts.

  Paul Prescod

• References:
  • Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...

• Prev by Date: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• Next by Date: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• Previous by thread: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• Next by thread: New Generation Browsers (Was: XDocs and XForms?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread