> Flash (though I have grown to hate it...) is much 
> better and is here today. 
> Yes it is owned by MACR, but the file format is open 
> like PDF.

"better"? Than FOP or SVG? Hopefully you don't mean SVG. There is a good
comparison of .SWF and SVG at:
http://www.carto.net/papers/svg/comparison_flash_svg.html

I think the comparison shows that SVG is more naturally mapped to
certain sorts of application, it is far from just a Flash replacement. I
still don't see why FOP would ever serve up plain SVG, it has trouble
enough getting more than a trivial amount of SVG integrated with FO.

SVG is here today as a medium for static graphics, it will be here
tomorrow as a web medium if browsers ever support it natively (in
addition to other forms of XML). In IE today you need workarounds to use
SVG with other namespaces, such as:
http://www.jenitennison.com/xslt/utilities/svg-utils.html

Even as awkward as that is, it shows the potential. XHTML and SVG,
XForms and SVG...

It would be great if there were a widely distributed browser with good
support for multiple namespaces inline. 



Max




 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list