• To: AndrewWatt2000@a..., simonstl@s..., xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XML, Rich Internet Apps
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 09:56:21 -0800
• In-reply-to: <7d.3140c8a1.2b1239e1@a...>
• References: <7d.3140c8a1.2b1239e1@a...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021016

AndrewWatt2000@a... wrote:

>
>
> Simon,
>
> But why HTML at all? What can HTML do that SVG can't already do or 
> won't very soon be able to do?
>
> Put HTML/XHTML to one side ... it's yesterday's technology, after
> all .... and you will get (in a little time) your holy grail of XML on 
> the Web.

I think that it is wrong-headed to pit SVG against XHTML.

> SVG has enormous potential as a communication tool and is ideally 
> suited to be a key technology in "XML on the Web".

Of course it is. But SVG is at a different level of abstraction than is 
XHTML. SVG could only replace XHTML by duplicating all of the 
functionality of XHTML.

  Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML, Rich Internet Apps
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>

• References:
  • Re: XML, Rich Internet Apps
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...

• Prev by Date: Re: What are the arguments *for* XHTML 2.0?
• Next by Date: RE: RDF and the new releases
• Previous by thread: Re: XML, Rich Internet Apps
• Next by thread: Re: XML, Rich Internet Apps
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread