Microsoft Wants To Participate In SVG Development

rossendryv writes "After many years of fighting against the standard, Microsoft announced they are joining the WC3's SVG working group to help with the development of SVG. 'We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform,' said Patrick Dengler, senior program manager on Microsoft's Internet Explorer team in a blog post."

Comments

LOL.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Funny, funny.

Re:LOL.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, thought the same; but, the ISO downfall, that slip might actually prove accurate... and we're the ones who are going to be pissed...

Re:LOL.

[mwvdlee]

Coming soon to a computer near you: "MSSVG; it's almost SVG!"
Oh, I can't wait to find out what all the neato, Windows-specific incompatibilities are going to be!
I was kinda happy with MS not joining in any standards, atleast that way the standards remain standard.

Re:LOL.

[nschubach]

DirectVG...

Re:LOL.

[Will.Woodhull]

Coming soon to a computer near you: "MSSVG; it's the ENHANCED SVG!"

Fixt dat for ya.

What irritates me most at the moment are slashdot sigs that call for the death of perfectly good memes. The sophomoric quality of slashdot is a part of its charm.

Re:LOL.

[uberdilligaff]

LiveVG...

Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[sconeu]

I'm sure their help will be just like that they gave to the development of OpenGL.

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[wealthychef]

Microsoft has a proven track record and a known strategy of packing standards boards to subvert them for their own uses. I'm thinking of a recent story in which a presentation was leaked about this, cannot find the citation

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[MiniMike]

Step 1: Embrace
Status: In Progress <laughter type="maniacal" />

Step 2: Extend
Status: Inevitable

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[denis-The-menace]

It was probably about getting OOXML to become an ISO standard that only MS could comply with...

"In order to gain ISO approval, Microsoft needed to garner the requisite number of “P” votes, and the influx of many new “P” voting members, most of whom were in favour of OOXML, was striking."

http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/microsoft-ooxml-and-iso

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[Hurricane78]

Or HTML.

We should make pictures similar to the John Locke fucks things up (expand gallery) ones, but with Microsoft in the middle picture. ;)

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[msclrhd]

Or in XAML: <Laughter Voice="{Binding Type:Evil}" EmbraceExtendExtinguish.Stage="Embrace"><Intonation.Type>Manical</Intonation.Type></Laughter>.

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[msuarezalvarez]

You need to review the concept of markup...

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[Anonymous Coward]

The laughter is supposed to be after the words, not over them. It was intended to be parsed as a joke, not something that would actually work somewhere. Please review the concept of "joke"...

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[eugene2k]

Judging by the members of the SVG working group (Apple, Opera, Mozilla) it's unlikely that they will be able to solely extend the standard.

P.S. Oh, and Microsoft is already mentioned there

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[jimshatt]

Do you mean the evangelism is war thingy? http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/12/26/2238218/Groklaw-Putting-Comes-v-Microsoft-Docs-Online

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[selven]

this?

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[Anonymous Coward]

Pardon, but I think you're mistaken.

> It was probably about getting OOXML to become an ISO standard that only MS could comply with...

The idea, I think, was getting OOXML to become an ISO standard that not even MS could comply with... because that would make people doubt the entire standard format idea and keep using the old formats.

In the same vein, OOXML should fit the bill of procurements requiring "standard formats" while forcing the continued use of those non-standards trash like doc/xls etc.

MHO.

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[msuarezalvarez]

It is somewhat ironic that having completely misssed the joke, you tell me that... and while my joke was clearly stupid, so was yours!

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[wealthychef]

Yep, that was it, thanks. Amusing to see how many examples are showing up, though.

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[Simetrical]

Microsoft has a proven track record and a known strategy of packing standards boards to subvert them for their own uses.

If you think the SVG Working Group is going to be subverted by Microsoft, you haven't participated much in the W3C. Each organization gets one vote, if a vote is needed, and every single organization in the Working Group is almost certainly a competitor of Microsoft. We're not talking some organization of government reps that Microsoft can buy off; you can't buy off your own competitors.

Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT

[wealthychef]

They may not be successful, but I have a feeling they will try. Based on what? Nothing but their reputation, I admit!

Torpedo?

[pete-classic]

I don't really know how the W3C is organized, but shouldn't there be some protection against allowing organizations who are openly hostile toward a technology from sitting on the committee? Isn't this just common sense?

Who do they think they are? The UN?

-Peter

Re:Torpedo?

[Anonymous Coward]

Common sense does not exist. It is a concept invented by those who wish to use the appeal of populism to push their own agenda. In this particular case, you are using the populist idea that the UN is "bad" to push the idea that Microsoft should be restricted from participating in the SVG group. No doubt you stand to gain because you are either a Mac or Linux advocate.

Personally, I'd rather not see either the SVG working group or the UN start to arbitrarily ban members for having the "wrong" opinions.

Re:Torpedo?

[Mitchell314]

Agreed. Microsoft should be allowed to contribute once they prove themselves at building a good OS. Probably somewhere around Web 6.0, but we're patient.

Re:Torpedo?

[pete-classic]

Cute troll.

For the benefit of those who might be led astray by your post:

1. Open standards don't harm anyone. Well, anyone except for those who want to control their customers with proprietary formats. If thinking that's a bad idea is "populist", then I'm guilty.
2. My shot at the UN was an afterthought. The same idea applies, that people who seem to want an organization to fail at their objective aren't helpful to that organization. Feel free to work against SVG, just not in the SVG working group!
3. Get a user account. They're free, and they allow us to have a conversation. As it stands, I have no way of knowing if any reply is from you.

-Peter

Re:Torpedo?

[AvitarX]

Mozilla too.

Re:Torpedo?

[dissy]

So... By your logic. Who should be able to contribute.... I haven't really found a good OS yet...

Those people and companies who either plan to, or do, already support the standard they want on the board to submit changes to.

Why should Microsoft get a say-so in how SVG development goes when they openly state they will not add it to IE?

Let them update IE to something more recent than 10 year old tech, and people MIGHT listen a little more to their opinions and desires (Thou probably not many more)

Re:Torpedo?

[cstdenis]

xBSD junk See linux but with a worse UI.

BSD runs the same xorg/KDE/Gnome as Linux, not a worse UI, the SAME bad UI.

If you want to criticize it you should be complaining about it's lesser hardware compatibility (in terms of multimedia, etc) or less features (eg. no clustered file system/DRBD equivalent).

Re:Torpedo?

[cstdenis]

I run lynx you insensitive clod.

Re:Torpedo?

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux hasn't required .conf modification (at least, in the major distros) for three years.
Windows has been stable since Windows Server 2003 and fast since, well, Windows 7. Still there, though.
OS/X is OS/X. That's what the users want.
BSD runs the same UI as Linux. The rest is what the users want.
VMS == Same

I use Windows 7 primarily myself, but there are still tasks that make me flip to my Ubuntu partition.

Re:Torpedo?

[Anonymous Coward]

OS/X is OS/X.

That name is only valid when X==2, and I doubt users really want that. The Apple product is OS X.

Re:Torpedo?

[Anonymous Coward]

How am I being a "troll"? Just because I disagree with you and pissed you off by daring to express myself? I suppose you and the slashdot moderators who (co-incidentally, I'm sure) agree with your assessment feel that only the "correct" opinions should be allowed?

Feel free to disagree (I wont, and cant, moderate you down for it), but I see no evidence that Microsoft is actively undermining SVG simply by their participation in the working group. In fact, like it or not but their participation now means it is far more likely to succeed. Presumably you are passionate about SVG succeeding and not simply passionate about Microsoft failing, so I would have thought you would see this as good news.

PS: The slashdot group think that pervades every discussion here is the reason why I don't bother with an account. I've tried in the past and have been downmodded into oblivion.

Re:Torpedo?

[DaFallus]

Kind of sounds like a trap...

Re:Torpedo?

[pete-classic]

How am I being a "troll"?

By making inflammatory statements that you can't be reasonably assumed to actually believe. (Please note that your intent doesn't matter. If you're just crazy, the post is still a troll.)

Just because I disagree with you and pissed you off by daring to express myself?

A beautiful case in point. I've done nothing to make you feel so persecuted. So, either you're a nut job with a persecution complex, or your playing hurt as part of a troll. Make sense?

Of course the answer to your ridiculous question is no.

I suppose you and the slashdot moderators who (co-incidentally, I'm sure) agree with your assessment feel that only the "correct" opinions should be allowed?

You understand that Slashdot hasn't had "moderators" in the sense you seem to be using for over a decade, right? I'm a moderator right now. You could be two in just two simple steps. 1. Log in. 2. Contribute. Good luck!

Feel free to disagree (I wont, and cant, moderate you down for it), but I see no evidence that Microsoft is actively undermining SVG simply by their participation in the working group. In fact, like it or not but their participation now means it is far more likely to succeed.

I don't understand why you hold your ignorance up as evidence. I encourage you to do a little research and discover the history of Microsoft's relationship with SVG to date. And its history with standards bodies. I'm sure it will shed light on my comments.

Presumably you are passionate about SVG succeeding and not simply passionate about Microsoft failing, so I would have thought you would see this as good news.

Can you tell me a better predictor of of a person or an organizations behavior than the history of his or its behavior?

I am a fan of technological progress. I've used SVG to good effect. Open standards have universally proven beneficial to society.

I am perfectly indifferent to the success or failure of Microsoft. But I'm very much against allowing Microsoft to torpedo a useful standard like SVG. I am a stanch capitalist, and I encourage microsoft to compete in the marketplace. But that doesn't mean I have to accept their track record of dirty tricks that ultimately retard progress.

It would certainly benefit SVG if Microsoft sincerely supported it. And if they wanted to do that, they have but to implement it in their browser.

But, they refuse this, while seeking to sit on the working group. If that isn't suspicious to you, then you are paranoid and gullible in a way that I would have thought impossible.

PS: The slashdot group think that pervades every discussion here is the reason why I don't bother with an account. I've tried in the past and have been downmodded into oblivion.

Yes, Slashdot is a horrible place full of meanies. And yet, here you are. Yet another example of you ostensibly taking a position, but clearly having contradicting underlying motives.

-Peter

Re:Torpedo?

[Anonymous Coward]

Awesome. So I am a troll because I am not suspicious enough of Microsoft's motives, and there is no slashdot "groupthink", just carefully considered individual moderations that happen to coincide with silencing any opinion that isn't critical enough of Microsoft.

Careful there, you may hurt yourself if your trick knee jerks into your head.

Re:Torpedo?

[pete-classic]

Good talk.

-P

Re:Torpedo?

[JohnBailey]

So... By your logic. Who should be able to contribute.... I haven't really found a good OS yet...

Companies with no vested interest in subverting standards.

Re:Torpedo?

[jsebrech]

Actually, microsoft's recent track record with the W3C is quite positive. In IE8 they implemented full support for CSS 2.1 (they even released a large test suite to help the other browsers improve their CSS 2.1 support) and a decent level of support for WAI ARIA (accessibility spec). They also looked ahead and implemented native json encoding/decoding (part of HTML5), and the web storage spec (yet to be finalized). And they've contributed positively to the HTML5 working group.

So really, if you look at the past few years, there's no reason whatsoever to deny them access, because they've been pretty good W3C citizens.

Re:Torpedo?

[Anonymous Coward]

Awesome. So I am a troll because I am not suspicious enough of Microsoft's motives, and there is no slashdot "groupthink", just carefully considered individual moderations that happen to coincide with silencing any opinion that isn't critical enough of Microsoft.

Careful there, you may hurt yourself if your trick knee jerks into your head.

Actually, just the fact that you're coming off like a crazed, persecution-addicted dickhole.

Re:Torpedo?

[pete-classic]

They certainly seem to have turned over a new leaf in terms of implementing standards in IE. I hardly think this absolves them of the guilt of the dirty tricks campaign they ran against OOXML.

-Peter

Re:Torpedo?

[pete-classic]

ODF. That gets me EVERY TIME.

-Peter

Re:Torpedo?

[blind biker]

I don't really know how the W3C is organized, but shouldn't there be some protection against allowing organizations who are openly hostile toward a technology from sitting on the committee? Isn't this just common sense?

Who do they think they are? The UN?

For those who don't get the UN reference: the OP is referring to the UN commission for human rights, regularly filled and chaired by countries that shit all over human rights.

Re:Torpedo?

[lordmetroid]

Lynx are for rich people, I run curl you insensitive clod!

Re:Torpedo?

[newcastlejon]

On the other hand I never get an ODF. It might be neat, but when the guy with the cornered market doesn't support it you need something with a lot more pulling power than a file format to win people over.

Re:Torpedo?

[Mitchell314]

Actually, by my logic, it was a joke.

Re:Torpedo?

[Mitchell314]

Chill, I was not flame baiting. I really didn't think MS should bother, that was my point. The whole 'wait for a good OS' was just poking fun. If you got all upset about it, then you probably have been glued to your computer for too long, whatever the OS may be.

Re:Torpedo?

[Mitchell314]

Mozilla doesn't make OS's. Just the system. :P

Re:Torpedo?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, UI is a superset of GUI. You are talking about GUI, but there are other UIs available, like the console. In that department xBSD does a lot better than Linux IMHO.

Re:Torpedo?

[Hatta]

BSD runs the same xorg/KDE/Gnome as Linux, not a worse UI, the SAME bad UI.

*BSD runs the BSD userland instead of the GNU userland. So it is just like linux with a worse UI.

Re:Torpedo?

[Nevyn]

*BSD runs the BSD userland instead of the GNU userland. So it is just like linux with a worse UI.

Be fair. They have a worse kernel too.

Re:Torpedo?

[Simetrical]

Actually, microsoft's recent track record with the W3C is quite positive. In IE8 they implemented full support for CSS 2.1 (they even released a large test suite to help the other browsers improve their CSS 2.1 support) and a decent level of support for WAI ARIA (accessibility spec). They also looked ahead and implemented native json encoding/decoding (part of HTML5), and the web storage spec (yet to be finalized). And they've contributed positively to the HTML5 working group.

I agree with all of those except the last. Microsoft has been virtually silent in the HTMLWG. There were a few posts by Adrian Bateman, and one or two other people who posted something and then usually let it hang without further discussion, but that's about it. They even employ one of the three co-chairs, Paul Cotton, but he says very little that's not strictly administrative. The impression I get is that the developers don't freely engage in discussion, just drop off collective feedback and watch what happens.

In contrast, Microsoft employees have been very active in some WG mailing lists I've subscribed to, like the CSS and font WGs. Dunno what the deal is with HTML5, but it doesn't seem like what Microsoft's most focused on right now. I'd be surprised to see large-scale HTML5 implementation in IE9, although I'm sure they'll add a few more features.

This Should Be Interesting

[eldavojohn]

So basically you tried to shove your own proprietary format (XAML?) down our throats but that didn't work. So you thought you'd wait it out and see who had the biggest cajones in this game of chicken where people had to pick? But then Google and Adobe just made plugins for IE that made SVG work which kind of let the air out of your tires. And now, before you've even implemented the SVG Tiny spec in Internet Explorer you are saying things like 'We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform'? So where would that leave IE since it has not implemented said important component of next-generation web platforms?

So you basically want a say in which direction the spec takes from now on without having proven to anyone that you are truly committed to this?

Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment and hope everyone forgets about your blatant disregard for SVG and make it seem like SVG had always been in your plans but you're only now just getting around to it?

I mean, you're looking mighty foolish now no matter which route you take.

All that angst and animosity aside, I applaud this action. Get it implemented in IE right now so I can start writing crap that utilizes basic graphics without having to post an unnecessarily large image for a flow chart and we can start to carve down the Flash usage out there.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[LOLLinux]

What does XAML have to do with SVG and vector graphics? XAML is just an XML based mark-up language.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[LOLLinux]

It seems you must be confusing XAML with VML.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Meshach]

Agreed. And it sounds like the SVG group is welcoming Microsoft to the table. From the article:

"On behalf of the SVG WG, let me welcome you to the group. We're excited by your joining, and look forward to your participation...and hopefully SVG support in IE9!"

Microsoft is a big monolithic company; they don't move quickly. If they put SVG in IE9 everyone will benifit. I think this will lead to good things for SVG.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Jason Earl]

Dengler didn't commit to add SVG to IE, and the company declined to comment about that possibility when asked.

Until Microsoft commits to supporting SVG in IE it is hard to see Microsoft's supposed support of the standard as anything but disingenuous. As you point out, Microsoft's position at this point is ridiculous. Not only has Microsoft been actively promoting an SVG competitor, but the primary reason why SVG isn't ubiquitous is the fact that SVG is not supported in Internet Explorer.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[jpmorgan]

What does XAML have to do with SVG? Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too. They're equally unrelated.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[25thCenturyQuaker]

"Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment and hope everyone forgets..."

<Elaine Benes-ish>"That's what they are! They're real sidlers!!!"</Elaine Benes-ish>

Someone needs to slip little boxes of Tic-Tacs in Microsoft's pockets.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

What does XAML have to do with SVG? Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too. They're equally unrelated.

Yeah seriously. XAML is a markup format for representing object trees in the .net framework. End of discussion. It has NOTHING to do with vector graphics. In example, you can build a workflow in XAML if you so inclined. Just as easily, (well sorta) you can build a WPF without any XAML. Now granted, the choice of what objects you choose to represent themselves could be about vector graphics but that's the choice of classes and not the XAML.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

You do know that Adobe has stopped supporting their SVG plug-in, right? It was all fine and dandy until they bought Macromedia and didn't need a Flash competitor anymore.

dom

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[msclrhd]

MFC is a C++ UI framework, with classes for different UI widgets and Operating System components (such as threads). WinForms is MFC for C#.

XAML is an XML serialisation format for a set of namespaces that define UI widgets (think Mozilla XUL, Qt UI XML or Gtk's Glade), vector graphics (shapes, gradient fills, etc -- think SVG) and other bits and pieces (it even supports styling (think CSS in XML) and data templates (think XSL:T bound to C# data classes instead of XML elements)).

That is, you can do things like:
     
instead of:
      Rectangle r = new Rectangle();
      r.Fill = "Red";

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[jpmorgan]

No, it seems the GGP is confusing XAML with VML.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[dwiget001]

|| Do you send Microsoft an invoice per post or is Steve Ballmer playing your skin flute right now? ||

Good, gawd, man!

At least, somehow, give a *warning* before you post such stuff!

*mumbles* Now, where is that industrial sized pack of Mental Floss (TM)?

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it seems the GGP is confusing XAML with VML.

JP Morgan strikes again. And we were wondering why the financial crisis came about ...

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[ElMiguel]

And cajones with cojones. Cajones means drawers, of the furniture kind.

Mmm. Cajones... furniture... flying chairs... There must be a pun in there somewhere.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[DrXym]

The laughable part is Microsoft has been supported VML for over a decade. If they can render one vector language, what's the big deal about rendering SVG?

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[msclrhd]

Ah, /. is eating the tag. Should be:
      <Rectangle Fill="Red"/>

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[gbjbaanb]

Not necessarily, if he means Silverlight (as it uses XAML as the markup 'code')

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment

I don't know, but that "l" managed to slide a couple characters at the last moment before you hit submit.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[clampolo]

What does XAML have to do with SVG? Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too.

Not really. WinForms and MFC are for desktop application deployment. XAML and WPF allow deployment as executable apps but also can be embedded into web applications (i.e. Silverlight).

The complaint is that Microsoft has refused to support SVG in order to force people onto Silverlight. So the complaints are completely relevant. And with Microsoft supporting VML it would be trivial to support it in IE, so it seems that someone in upper management has told them NOT to support SVG.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Vahokif]

You have no idea what you're talking about. XAML is an XML-based UI markup language like XUL.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[SiggyF]

XAML started out as WVG (Windows Vector Graphics), they took all svg elements and Capitalized them, the rest is extensions.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[BitZtream]

XAML is more like XBL (mozilla), not really like SVG. Its used for interface definitions, not graphics. Contrary to popular belief, both flash and SVG can be used for user interfaces, and you're a fucking retard if you do it.

VML is more like SVG. Its made for turning structured data into pretty pictures that use carbon based lifeforms find more useful.

Theres nothing wrong with competing standards initially, there is also nothing wrong with saying 'alright, we didn't when, we'll support your idea instead'. Why do you have a problem with them giving up and doing what you wanted in the first place.

Your last paragraph is about right. I'm not going to praise Microsoft for being special because they made this choice, its just the right thing to do. I'm happy they aren't taking the typical MS approach YET.

Please kill flash. Please. I'm really tired of Adobe. I used to love them, after my first couple of years of using photoshop 2, I probably would have ranked them as one of the greatest software companies in the world. Unfortunately, they've got to the point where their apps are mature and theres nothing else to do, so now they are doing what MS and EA does and basically just changing things every so often to entice or induce you into upgrading, forcefully if possible.

If killing flash means I have to deal with MS for the time being, so be it. I'd rather just have to deal with MS (XAML or VML) and SVG, than deal with MS, SVG, AND Adobe (flash).

The only thing really needed to kill flash is someone to make a C SVG renderer that doesn't suck. Don't bother telling me about the C SVG renderers out there, I know about them and they all suck donkey balls. All browser implementations are utter crap and no browser should claim SVG support. Yes, you can draw a smiley face, but thats pretty much where it ends, nothing non-trivial renders properly in any browser, FORGET about interactivity, filters or animation or other SMIL linking (like sound).

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[BitZtream]

Look, you can knock IE for not supporting SVG, but the fact that Firefox and WebKit know about SVG and will in some cases display them is not the same as them SUPPORTING SVG.

Firefox and WebKit both suck ass at SVG support, if you don't think so than you really haven't done anything with SVG outside of some examples you found on the web.

No browser supports any SVG 'standard', IE is far from alone.

When I need to use SVGs on a web page, I end up embedding a Java applet using Apache Batik so I at LEAST have support for the useful portions of the standard beyond basic filled text and primitive shapes.

As SVG support in browsers stands now, you render to an image and display it rather than attempting to let the browser handle it, that is, if you want the SVG to actually work as designed.

When someone creates a open (IE: BSD licensed so EVERYONE can actually use it) C SVG library, and the browsers actually pick up on it, THEN I'll start worrying about which browsers support SVG, until then SVG is more of a joke than XAML or VML, both of which have better support on OSes other than Windows than SVG has anywhere (with the exception of Java apps using Batik).

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment

I don't know, but that "l" managed to slide a couple characters at the last moment before you hit submit.

sidle (v): To advance in an unobtrusive, furtive, or coy way.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Jason Earl]

First of all, both Firefox and Webkit support infinitely more SVG than IE. What's more, a huge part of the reason that SVG isn't more popular is that IE does not support it. SVG Tiny would be more than good enough for *my* needs, but I can't use it and still support IE so I am stuck with Flash. The rest of the browser developers don't have unlimited resources. They are hardly going to pour lots of time and effort into a standard that most developers can't use.

Second of all, librsvg is LGPLed, which should be perfectly fine for anyone that wants to simply include SVG support in their application, closed source or not. The only reason to prefer a BSD licensed library over an LGPLed library is if you want to make extensions to the library that you don't want to share with others. If that is the case, then you can write your own library and do what you want with it. For libraries that propose to be standard-compliant the LGPL is arguably the perfect license.

Either way it doesn't change the fact that Microsoft has dragged its heels on this particular standard. Now it wants a seat at the standards table despite the fact that it doesn't have a browser that will display SVG AT ALL. If joining the committee were accompanied by a commitment to actually implement SVG at some later time I would actually applaud Microsoft's behavior. However, that isn't the case, and so I do not see how to interpret Microsoft's actions in a non-skeptical manner.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[WindBourne]

what's the big deal about rendering SVG?
Absolutely none. They just do not want to since it does not align with their business need of a monopoly. Typically, if they embrace a competing item, it is because it is catching on, and they are losing ground.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[shutdown -p now]

XAML is an XML serialisation format for a set of namespaces that define UI widgets

That is incorrect. XAML is a general-purpose XML-based serialization format for CLR object trees (and, in .NET 4, arbitrary object graphs). It doesn't have much to do specifically with UI. For example, the following is a perfectly valid piece of XAML markup, describing a collection with three elements:

<sc:ArrayList xmlns:s="clr-namespace:System;assembly=mscorlib"
              xmlns:sc="clr-namespace:System.Collections;assembly=mscorlib"
              Capacity="100">
    <s:Object/>
    <s:String>Foo</s:String>
    <s:Int32>123</s:Int32>
</sc:ArrayList>

It just so happens that WPF (and Silverlight) provide a set of UI-related classes, instances of which are typically combined into trees, and hence are convenient to represent in XAML.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't mean to pick on you, but it's a pet peeve of mine that people say something is "infinitely more" because something else has 0.

If I have 2 ice cream cones, and you have no ice cream cones, I don't have infinitely more ice cream cones than you. I have 2 more ice cream cones than you.

Invoking infinity clouds the issue with nonsense.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[The Wild Norseman]

Someone needs to slip little boxes of Tic-Tacs in Microsoft's pockets.

I hear the Slovaks are pretty good at that sort of thing...

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

So basically you tried to shove your own proprietary format (XAML?) down our throats...

How did Microsoft force XAML down our throats?

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. If users perceive SVG as giving them scalable "web pages", they may start expecting same of their operating system GUI objects too... yeah, I'd like that...

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[CAIMLAS]

The idea is simple; they've done it before and they'll do it again: say they'll support something, and when people see it supports $otherTech they buy on, thinking what they've been using, or wanting to use, will work. Then Microsoft will break it and say "you should've stuck with all-Microsoft technologies". Meanwhile, anyone using the non-Microsoft technologies will get burned and gun-shy, and be less likely to step off the path in the future (we're thinking of business types here). That's where the "profit" comes in.

Re:This Should Be Interesting

[Jason Earl]

I agree that this has, in certain cases, worked in Microsoft's favor. However, on the web this has backfired badly against Microsoft.

One of the primary reasons that Microsoft has had such a hard time moving businesses away from Windows XP and IE 6 is that Microsoft tricked a whole pile of businesses into pretending that IE6 was the Internet. Then, after these business were locked into Microsoft's technology stack, Microsoft ripped out support for key Microsoft-only technologies in newer versions of IE. There were some good reasons for removing these mis-features, but this particular blunder on Microsoft's part basically amounts to what I believe is the biggest mistake in Microsoft history. Not only did this cause Microsoft's customers to stick with Windows XP instead of upgrading, but it also made it more difficult for Microsoft's partners and customers as they were forced to support more and more versions of Windows.

What's more, because these executives have been burned before they are far more interested in real web standards than they were in the past. No one wants to create a web application that you have to throw away just a few years later.

To a certain extent Microsoft is moving towards web standards because the alternative is to become completely irrelevant as a web client. Both Google and Mozilla have better browsers. If Microsoft gets too far behind then customers will simply give up on IE. That is especially dangerous because, despite Microsoft's best efforts, the operating system is slowing being supplanted by the web browser as the platform of choice. Heck, there are tools to provide for SVG on IE right now.

That being the case, I still think that it is premature for Microsoft to get involved on the standards committee before they have a working implementation.

SVG development?

[Bananatree3]

What do you developers prefer as a development environment? I personally use Inkscape, an open source Vector graphics editor. What does Slashdot like to use?

Re:SVG development?

[SnarfQuest]

True Slashdot developers bang rocks against a bare wire to transmit 1's and 2's to an IBM 7 track magtape (zero hadn't been invented yet). Who needs this fancy-smancy graphical interface crap anyway?

Re:SVG development?

[Anonymous Coward]

Emacs

Re:SVG development?

[CannonballHead]

Who needs this fancy-smancy graphical interface crap anyway?

How do you see the rocks?

Re:SVG development?

[gringer]

More recent versions of emacs are able to render SVG files, and I have actually used it on a few occasions to clean up some SVG files (particularly to reduce their file size).

Re:SVG development?

[MiniMike]

True Slashdot developers bang rocks against a bare wire to transmit 1's and 2's to an IBM 7 track magtape (zero hadn't been invented yet).

I thought for a zero the developers banged one of the rocks against their head, instead of the other rock. After enough low-value long ints, they are promoted to editor.

Re:SVG development?

[edittard]

vi

Re:SVG development?

[Anonymous Coward]

illustrator

Re:SVG development?

[donatzsky]

I haven't tried it myself, but there's also sK1.

Re:SVG development?

[damianpeterson]

Inkscape all the way. I've been using it for a good couple of years now for logo design as well as web page layout which I export to PNG and slice up in GIMP.

Re:SVG development?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think either Vim or some XML editor. Though perhaps the latter may be too hand-holdy for some.

Re:SVG development?

[Anonymous Coward]

Obligatory:

Now all emacs needs is a good text editor to make it a first class operating system.

Re:SVG development?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep - Inkscape. Really nice.
But also dia.

Re:SVG development?

[BitZtream]

Depends.

Preface: I create non-trivial SVGs that pull in customer data to create a static image for web pages. An example would be something like a tshirt printing website that uses SVGs as templates and allows the user to enter text to be displayed on the shirt and presenting it to the user for verification of the design before printing it. Its far more complex than that as we have custom images, company wide data, all sorts of stuff, the templates can be rather complex and result in SVGs which are several megs in size.

All of these pros and cons are from my perspective and requirements, they wouldn't apply to some guy who just wants to make drawings for him/herself for instance. One of my requirements is that the SVG is 100% compliant with the SVG standard, or with the 1.2 working draft.

Basic SVGs? I prefer Sketsa (Commercial and overpriced), but we use Batik as our backend processor, so the fact that they share the same rendering engine means I get WYSIWYG for the most part. It is however seriously lacking in features that we require.

As an editor, it doesn't support: text flows, setting attributes of the SVG elements that it is unaware of (can be fixed with a plugin, but I've not finished that code yet!), it has some seriously retarded bugs when setting attributes on elements that it does know about. Interactivity and animation, is a wash, I think the recent versions allow some basic things with an experimental plugin but I've haven't tried them. They were trying to make a flash-like editor interface at one point. It does produce SVGs that are standard compliant. I've yet to come across one that didn't validate and render properly in any known good rendering engine (Batik, Adobe SVG plugin, Renesis SVG plugin).

Inkscape, the latest release is actually getting to where its useful for my needs. Recent versions include text flow support which just makes me as happy as can be. It does some utterly retarded things as well. It uses its own custom extensions for filters even when saving in the 'standard' svg format rather than its own, even when the standard filters work the exact same way. Its rendering backend isn't very standards compliant. It won't pass even a small percentage of the tests for the most basic SVG profile test suite. It will now generate SVG fonts, but can't render SVG fonts used in documents. The font generation does not pass the SVG test suite however.

I can now use Inkscape to edit some SVGs without resorting to a text editor, but the fact that it saves with its own extensions even when I tell it to use the standard format means that in a lot of cases, its just used to generate a reference block of code that I use with a text editor.

Adobe Illustrator, for someone who knows nothing about SVGs and doesn't need to do anything really special, Illustrator works great. With the right export settings it will output very compliant SVG files. The code it produces isn't always the prettiest, but it does seem to work and it seems that Batik will pretty much always render it identical to Illustrator, which is a good sign. Good, but not perfect font support, it uses its own names so even if using system fonts, if you don't embed them in the document they fall back to the default when rendered in other renderers because the names don't match. Easy fix by embedded the fonts but this isn't always legally allowed and bloats the hell out of the file size in our case as we have to include all the glyphs in the font in the SVG file as the actual text in the SVG file may change at rendering time (these SVGs are really templates that pull in external data). We use this to allow low end graphics people who can stumble around illustrator to produce SVGs which we can then finalize by hand to be useful for our templates. It doesn't allow you to edit any of the attributes of SVG elements directly. It does allow for Interactivity and does do a good job of using proper SVG filters.

The one I always end up in however is a text editor. I generally use one o

Re:SVG development?

[Bananatree3]

Thanks for your thorough review. The most "advanced" stuff I do is fairly basic compared to most professional SVG drawings. However, it's nice to see how Inkscape fairs on the compliance level. When I make something for export to someone using another setup, I always ask for screenshot of how it renders on their end. Nothing like the final product crapping out because of bad rendering. I will also probably look at the mentioned sK1 project above to see how it fairs.

Re:SVG development?

[Anonymous Coward]

You had it easy! I had to shut or open a valve (transistors didn't exist yet, let alone wires) to send one value or the other (zero, one or two hadn't been invented, either).

Fixed

[hduff]

We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next generation Web platform. As evidenced by our ongoing involvement in W3C working groups, we are committed to participating in the standards process to subvert those standards to our benefit. Our involvement with the SVG working group builds on that commitment.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Fixed

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, no doubt. Microsoft is famous for bandwaggoning in on a spec, then 'extending' it to where it will only work with Microsoft products and therefore corner the market on the extension. They're a bit predatory about it, which comes from having Harvard Business School people on their payroll, so no surprises here.

So what exactly about Microsoft's latest scheme to corner a market is newsworthy?

Re:Fixed

[SnarfQuest]

Wait for them to require Word and Excell as part of the standard, which they never plan on implementing anyway.

Re:Fixed

[Yetihehe]

They are now more efficient at subverting. Remember those "embrace, extend, extinguish"? They didn't implement SVG in IE, so they are going straight to extend!

Re:Fixed

[tmp31416]

ahem.

quote:
"Wait a damn minute -- I invented Windows" - Xerox PARC

you should rather say:
"Wait a damn minute -- I invented Windows" - Douglas Engelbart

(Xerox did not invent as much as people like to say. They just continued Engelbart's unsung work. Period.)

tmp31416

Re:Fixed

[hduff]

ahem.

quote:

(Xerox did not invent as much as people like to say. They just continued Engelbart's unsung work. Period.)

tmp31416

He invented the computer mouse and important concepts. Brilliant guy, but did not put it all together in the way we now know Windows. Not as I read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Engelbart

Anyway, I'm just poking fun at the current Microsoft windows 7 ad campaign where many individuals claim to have invented "Windows". And I'm certain Engelbart drew upon earlier inspiration for his ideas. There is nothing new, just different ways to see old things.

Fun

[cheesybagel]

So they are no longer pushing their own proprietary VML vector format? Ah well. Since Adobe bought Macromedia SVG needs more people pushing it. The saving grace has been that some browsers (e.g. Firefox) natively support SVG now. So this is good.

Re:Fun

[byuu]

Not entirely. You still can't reference an SVG image via CSS, eg:
body { background: url(fade.svg); }

This is also true for Webkit-based browers. Only Opera 9+ seems to have full SVG integration with HTML and CSS ... quite a shame, really.

Re:Fun

[cheesybagel]

I remember the same thing being true for PNG. It will change in time...

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

[bcmm]

Title says it all. We've seen this before, folks.

Re:Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

[Verdatum]

I'm amazed it took 8 whole minutes of comments for someone to utter this, and more amazed the article wasn't already tagged as such. I really hope they don't put too much of a dent in things; I'm rather fond of SVG.

Re:Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

[Demonantis]

They might not plan to extinguish per say. Thinking of printer drivers they will probably beat the standard with a bat enough that you will need a PhD to figure out whats going on. If they can't get proprietary at least they can make it so they are the only ones with enough cash to develop the standard. You know if your not the best make it harder for other people to be the best.

Re:Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm more surprised the article was not tagged as donotwant.

Re:Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

[ignavus]

I'm amazed it took 8 whole minutes of comments for someone to utter this, and more amazed the article wasn't already tagged as such. I really hope they don't put too much of a dent in things; I'm rather fond of SVG.

(Mafia voice:) "That's a nice graphics standard you got there. Pity if anything happened to it."

Translation:

[FooAtWFU]

Silverlight didn't work, and we still want to kill Flash.

Re:Translation:

[Anonymusing]

And -- "How do our hands feel around your neck?"

Re:Translation:

[pete-classic]

Your point is well taken. But don't count Silverlight out yet. The sole fact that Netflix uses it for their streaming service is reason enough.

-Peter

Re:Translation:

[RobertM1968]

Your point is well taken. But don't count Silverlight out yet. The sole fact that Netflix uses it for their streaming service is reason enough.

-Peter

Which is the sole reason I dont use NetFlix. Or watch videos on Microsoft's site.

Re:Translation:

[pete-classic]

While I can identify with your position, if boycotts by the technologically conscious were by any means effective, Internet Explorer would have shriveled and died in the '90s.

-Peter

Re:Translation:

[anastasd]

Yep, Flash is a crime against humanity. :)

Re:Translation:

[davester666]

So, we'll implement something we'll call SVG, but only once the spec is changed to support Microsoft-only technologies.

Like, say, that it must be implemented as an ActiveX control...

Re:Translation:

[FlyingBishop]

It's certainly a nice thought (for them), but it won't work. As goes YouTube, so goes the Internet. Nothing Microsoft can do about that. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if IE9 at a bare minimum supports <video> and <audio> It's such a simple thing to hack into the engine that even they should be able to pull it off without any fuss.

SVG, that's a bit trickier, but they do have that VML renderer lying around.

Re:Translation:

[davester666]

Yeah, but it'll only support some Microsoft-specific decoders well, with poor if any support for other decoders, and with no easy way to add support for other decoders...

Re:Translation:

[Abreu]

Netflix is a non-entity for all of us outside the USA

Re:Translation:

[rident]

Yeah but being staunchly opposed to something is great fun. Also, sticking to your morals is very commendable. I do hope they don't join just to ruin the standard or offer halfassed support for it. Both of which make web developers struggle further while being coaxed into their closed standard for a lack of functionality in SVG which they assisted in creating. It's happened too many times, and by more than just these people.

Re:Translation:

[SenFo]

Which is the sole reason I dont use NetFlix. Or watch videos on Microsoft's site.

I've seen this response many times, yet I have never seen a reasonable explanation for the boycott. Do you hate Silverlight because it's Microsoft or is there something wrong with the technology that has made you stay away?

I have limited exposure to the Bing Video site, but with that limited exposure, I have had nothing but positive experiences. I've experienced no problem streaming HD content, for example. YouTube, on the other hand, struggled badly to stream 720P content through my FiOS connection running at 25 Mb/sec (both up and down).

From an architectural / security standpoint, Silverlight runs in a Sandbox, among other things, which greatly improve security (this most certainly isn't another Active X). Additionally, as a developer, I feel that C# is a better language than AS 3. I don't know any designers that have worked in Expression Blend, so I can't comment on their vantage point. I welcome their comments, however.

Re:Translation:

[Akaihiryuu]

Indeed. I used Netflix 4 years ago or so for awhile (before they did streaming videos). I had thought recently about starting up my subscription again, especially when I heard about the streaming video service (when I saw Windows and Mac listed I figured it was decent). Then I read about it, found out it was Silverlight only, and dismissed my idea to use Netflix at all. I will continue to use bittorrent for my rentals. Hence, their decision to support Silverlight cost them a subscription.

Re:Translation:

[Sulphur]

And -- "How do our hands feel around your neck?"

That doesn't bother you, does it. How about this?

Re:Translation:

[FlyingBishop]

And further fragment the current vorbis-H.264 slugfest? If Microsoft doesn't want HTML5 to succeed, they can just not implement it. Introducing yet another codec would be even dumber than Silverlight, since Silverlight fills a niche (studios want DRM.) Unless they decide to hack DRM into <video>, but I really find that unlikely.

Re:Translation:

[rident]

That is true and Microsoft's initiative to convert all things Flash on their network of sites to Silverlight has all but failed also (I did some of that development even). But Netflix is also a pretty big competitor for local/national rental shops and video rental vending machines like Red Box here in the States which are also limited by market just as flash based sites like Hulu. Even some of the more illicit divx streaming sites restrict their content to US only but that's probably more for bandwidth considerations than anything else. The great thing about software is that it can be replaced with much greater ease and savings than say, buried communications cable that isn't quite fast enough for everyone and their child to stream 1080p all day, everyday. I have a feeling that if Silverlight starts to fall out of the cards at hand Netflix will switch up for the new standard rather than loose customers because a browser doesn't know what Silverlight is. Plus if you've ever written any Silverlight you'll know that its not far from Javascript and XML in syntax and a conversion to Javascript, HTML5 and SVG shouldn't be that painful of a transition.

Re:Translation:

[maxume]

With any luck they'll just patch in support for a codec or two and then defer everything else to directshow, meaning that anything supported by ffmpeg will work, via ffdshow (or an offshoot).

I swear that isn't gibberish.

Re:Translation:

[icebraining]

From an architectural / security standpoint, Silverlight runs in a Sandbox, among other things, which greatly improve security (this most certainly isn't another Active X).

You know what improves security and performance? Streaming a damn MPEG file and let us decode it with our plugin of choice. Flash and Silverlight are a terrible choice for videos.

Re:Translation:

[BuckaBooBob]

Its likely that they will work and being the defaco SVG viewer for the windows platform and initally do some good work thus making it pointless for anyone else to continue to develop a svg viewer for the windows platform.. once they have established themselves.. they will undoubtedly start to add "Features" to svg that require MS API's... Much like they did with java..

Re:Translation:

[peragrin]

better than when you put then around my waist.

Re:Translation:

[Thuktun]

Microsoft's aging WMF/EMF format is really not conceptually different than SVG, though it's not an open standard and was highly tied to the Windows GDI. I don't think it's lack of ability to support SVG that's held them up, I think that was a strategic business decision.

Re:Translation:

[neokushan]

Personally, I can't see a single problem with Silverlight that doesn't exist within flash, including "OtherOS" support. We all know what Adobe is like when it comes to supporting 64bit Linux.
Then again, I honestly haven't had much use for flash over the last couple of years other than watching videos, something I'm hoping that will accomplish just as well. The only times I've needed flash other than this were when certain websites have, quite literally, forced me to use it, usually as part of some rediculous sign up process.
Silverlight is in much the same boat, albeit with a much smaller usage so I don't really see why people dislike it so much. It's no better or worse than flash, but at least it's a competitor, which one day might help the situation.

Re:Translation:

[selven]

I hate Silverlight because it's Microsoft trying to destroy the multiplatform nature of the web.

Re:Translation:

[hduff]

Do you hate Silverlight because it's Microsoft or is there something wrong with the technology that has made you stay away?

I would suspect because Silverlight is closed and proprietary, things that are unhelpful towards getting everything to "just work", requiring that additional money be spent unnecessarily to view content you've already paid for. Even attempts like Mono are pointless because those are ultimately tied to closed specs, patents and licenses and the rules can be changed at a whim thereby holding everyone hostage. If free, open standards are available what's the harm to the consumer in using them?

Re:Translation:

[geminidomino]

I do hope they don't join just to ruin the standard or offer halfassed support for it.

Why else *would* they join?

Re:Translation:

[geminidomino]

Which is the sole reason I dont use NetFlix. Or watch videos on Microsoft's site.

I've seen this response many times, yet I have never seen a reasonable explanation for the boycott. Do you hate Silverlight because it's Microsoft or is there something wrong with the technology that has made you stay away?

In my case: It doesn't work with my OS.

Whether or not that constitutes "something wrong with the technology" is something of a point of contention between me and Microsoft.

Re:Translation:

[jsebrech]

Actually, C# might be a better language than AS3, but it just doesn't matter. AS3 is good enough. Even AS1 was good enough, given that it was basically what javascript still is, and javascript is also "good enough". I would say both in terms of features and of performance the flash and silverlight platforms are roughly comparable.

There's only one thing that matters in the flash/silverlight competition: ubiquity. Whichever platform is most ubiquitous automatically has a leg up in developer mindshare. Flash is still getting used more because of this. I could see them losing their edge though. Office web will run better on silverlight, which is going to greatly boost silverlight adoption. At the same time, adobe isn't managing to close the security gaps in the flash player, which makes it a big risk in corporate deployments.

Re:Translation:

[sillybilly]

Well, software is hard work, and who likes to work for free, especially on things that you don't believe in nor enjoy doing? Do you? Wouldn't you rather spend your time partying than coding? And how else are you gonna extort money from software, by any other way than making it into intellectual property and have your users agree to a eula that criminalizes attempts to decompile or trying to figure out what makes it tick?

Re:Translation:

[sillybilly]

That's the only thing they know how to do: embrace, extend, extinguish. Like the Borg, they only know how to assimilate. Why do you think Slashdot carries a Borg icon for MS?

Re:Translation:

[TheRaven64]

The company I use in the UK that fills the same niche as Netflix (postal DVD rentals and now streaming) first implemented their streaming technology with some MS thing. I don't know exactly what it was, just that it didn't work with Macs. It turned out that a significant proportion of people tech-savy enough to want and with enough disposable income to afford it were Mac users. They now use Flash.

Re:Translation:

[mwvdlee]

Oh, it WILL support non-Micosoft decoders.

They'll just run with messed-up colors, badly out-of-sync sound and at 4FPS.

MS isn't about beating the competition, they're about beating up the competition.

Re:Translation:

[aztracker1]

Since silverlight supports H.264, they will probably include Silverlight in the next Ie, and simple have transparent support to their tags, and extend the DOM as needed. Honestly don't expect more from MS considering how poorly integrated the JS engine (COM Based) is by today's standards.

Re:Translation:

[ink]

Why else *would* they join?

Apple and the FSF also want Flash to die. Perhaps the enemy of our enemy really is our friend in this case. The motivations behind each organization may be different (or the same), but the end result is a win for open standards.

Re:Translation:

[nametaken]

That and Microsoft have made it mandatory to interact with some parts of their site, and made most of their video content unavailable for viewing with anything but Silverlight.

So while we see an increase in silverlight plugin installs, I consider quite a few of those as gun-to-the-head installs, and I take time out to personally motherfuck any website I see using that abomination.

Re:Translation:

[geminidomino]

Why else *would* they join?

Apple and the FSF also want Flash to die. Perhaps the enemy of our enemy really is our friend in this case. The motivations behind each organization may be different (or the same), but the end result is a win for open standards.

While I'd be hard pressed to refer to either Apple OR the FSF as "friends", one has to be seriously deluded to think that anything Microsoft intends would be "a win for open standards."

Re:Translation:

[hairyfeet]

I don't get all the hate either, as I've also had nothing but positive experiences with Silverlight (which runs MUCH better than the bloaty Flash piggy) and folks are cooking up some pretty cool tricks with it. Check out Windows4All which is a Virtual OS done in Silverlight. It is pretty neat, with Google Earth, Virtual PC, a Twitter Client, all running in a sandboxed Silverlight. And on this 1.7Ghz Sempron I'm typing this from it actually works quite well. And since it has a built in sandboxed IE if they can get this to run on Moonlight Linux users will have an easy way to get around those "IE only" sites. Maybe someone with Moonlight can give it a go, and tell us if it runs?

But there is just so much competition out there on the web and i just don't see MSFT being able to pull the 800 pound gorilla bit that much anymore. With the web it is too easy to just go around MSFT, and Vista showed they can't just dump a turkey and expect folks to jump on board like in the old days. And if Silverlight or SVG or the video tag kills the bloated ziggy piggy known as Flash I am all for it, I don't care who gets the ball rolling. That is the most bloated POS software I have seen in ages, and everybody has to have it for web video. I'm by Flash now like I was by IE 6 then. The sooner it is dead, the better.

Re:Translation:

[Anonymous Coward]

Until the technology exists to insert custom ads into the video while it's streaming, that's not going to happen. If there are people out there just tossing up MPEGs, by all means, support them. But don't gripe about how people choose to deliver the free content they're hosting.

Re:Translation:

[rtb61]

At the end of the day, it all depends on who M$ choose to send to represent them, whether they are delayers, poisoners or contributors. M$ has a well deserved bad reputation but, as always they should be given the opportunity to contribute and their activities should be measured upon their current behaviour rather than their history. Not that their history should be ignored but, they should always be given every opportunity to contribute positively, whilst every one keeps a sharp eye on them, a very sharp eye.

SVG will really open up the CAD market as well, so watch out for Autodesk, in fact they will suffer farm more harm than M$ (Visio never really went anywhere).

Re:Translation:

[jbengt]

.SVG will really open up the CAD market as well, so watch out for Autodesk, in fact they will suffer farm more harm than M$.

SVG, if wildly successful, will have no impact on AutoCAD, very little impact on any other Autdesk product.

Re:Translation:

[RobertM1968]

While I can identify with your position, if boycotts by the technologically conscious were by any means effective, Internet Explorer would have shriveled and died in the '90s.

-Peter

While I agree with you entirely, I am not doing it to boycott it. I simply have no intentions of supporting it, learning it, using it, downloading it or exposing myself to the plethora of security risks caused by installing it (and it's related framework - in Firefox of course, as I dont use IE for anything but web page testing).

Re:Translation:

[RobertM1968]

Well, in addition to those reasons, perhaps they want to figure out how best to easily support doing vector graphics from the programming tricks they can learn from others involved with SVG.

It wouldn't be the first time they borrowed code from elsewhere to try to improve their own product...

For instance... Intuit/(Money?), Stac Electronics for disk compression, the BSD stack (which they somehow managed to mangle the use of), much of Stardock's window dressing for XP (and all later versions of Windows), and too many others to list here.

I'm sure they'd be thrilled if they could both (a) make this a learning experience for themselves, and (b) ruin the standard (and thus the competition) in the process.

Re:Translation:

[SwedishPenguin]

This should not be a problem with the tag. You can use javascript to apply all sorts of transformations live to the streaming video.
Check this one out for instance: http://www.zachstronaut.com/lab/isocube.html (Firefox 3.5)
And this video demonstration of Firefox 3.5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tLBLVtIk3A

Re:Translation:

[thejynxed]

It will if they can implement a well-working CAD solution that uses SVG, and has collaborative sharing, etc instead of being locked into a single workstation. All of the sudden, there would be no need for Autodesk (or their ridiculous dongles and other assorted pap).

Re:Translation:

[arendjr]

Well, let me help you seeing that problem then. I'm using SUSE Linux 64bit and 64bit Chrome to browse the web. There's a wrapper to use the 32-bit Flash plugin and the latest Flash (which is on par with the Windows version) works without problem for me. You're right Adobe is not really playing nice with 64bit Linux, but in practice there's little problem.

On the other hand, SUSE is probably the best supported Linux distribution for Moonlight, yet Moonlight lags so much behind that there is more Silverlight content that doesn't work than content that does. That is very real practical problem for me. I know I'm a minority being a Linux user, but for me this is a clear reason to hate Silverlight.

If Microsoft would release a Silverlight version themselves for Linux, that would be on par with the Windows version, I would complain a lot less.

Finally, I agree Flash is also an evil, as is Silverlight. But I can live with such an "evil" if it solves practical problems for me. Flash however is already all around, and Silverlight fortunately isn't yet, and two evils are certainly worse than one.

Re:Translation:

[Anonymous Coward]

We all know what Adobe is like when it comes to supporting 64bit Linux.

I have been using their 64bit flash plugin for a while, it works well and AFAIK it's still the only supported 64bit platform, or at least it was.

Re:Translation:

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I can't see a single problem with Silverlight that doesn't exist within flash, including "OtherOS" support. We all know what Adobe is like when it comes to supporting 64bit Linux.

How about the fact that MS has a direct interest in sabotaging/degrading people's web/multi-media experience in "OtherOS", whereas Adobe doesn't?

Re:Translation:

[Anonymous Coward]

You do, of course, realize that Flash and Silverlight are plugins, too?

Re:Translation:

[pete-classic]

Silverlight is available for Mac. Netflix added support for Mac quite a while ago.

-Peter

Re:Translation:

[Hadlock]

That might be true, but in a country of 300+ million, netflix killed the brick and mortar video rental industry. It's gotten to the point where driving by a still-open blockbuster elicits remarks like "look! a blockbuster!" usually followed by comments like "i haven't seen one of those in ages. i guess netflix really DID kill blockbuster". From what I can tell, in other first world countries, many companies have used their business model to great success as well. Places like Brazil and Uruguay still have video rental shops, but in ten years time I think streaming video will have significant market penetration to the point that it begins to hurt 2nd/3rd world country video rental shops as well.

Re:Translation:

[icebraining]

Yes. Terrible plugins for video. With the mplayer plugin I can watch HD content without any problems. With the "Flash" plugin, I can barely watch youtube non-hd content without any lag.

Plugins should be good at _one_ thing, not try to take over the whole browsing.

Re:Translation:

[CAIMLAS]

I tend to dislike Microsoft because there's something wrong with their technology; silverlight is a good example of this.

Let's see:

* high system requirements
* only works on Windows
* high server-side technology curve to implement
* proprietary browser plug-in with no alternatives which is a pain in the ass to install (it's a lengthy install for a stupid little plugin, even on a fast computer; hurry up and wait!)

Want to use silverlight? Great, you're stuck on 2-3 platforms which Microsoft support. Good luck 3+ years down the line when you want to provide those videos without further development costs.

There is a very, very good reason why the "web" was conceptualized with open standards, and there have been great efforts to maintain said standards. It's very difficult to keep things working on a keel when you've got different parts which do not talk well with each other, so a monoculture at the infrastructure/standard level is very important.

Re:Translation:

[True Grit]

if boycotts by the technologically conscious were by any means effective, Internet Explorer would...

Boycotts against monopolies almost never work by definition (IE), but for your response to the GP to be relevant we would have to consider Netflix as a monopoly... I don't think so.

Until now, I didn't even know how Netflix delivered its movies, and now that I do know, I'll not ever waste my time going there.

NetFlix.com != IE (when it was a monopoly)

Re:Translation:

[Simetrical]

I do hope they don't join just to ruin the standard or offer halfassed support for it.

Why else *would* they join?

I'm all for Microsoft-bashing, but that's over the top. Microsoft realizes that sometimes their interests lie in supporting certain standards. They support lots of standards to the letter. CSS2.1 support in IE8 is as good as any other browser if not better, for instance. Their C and C++ compilers, SQL database, POSIX implementation, and so forth are about as standards-compliant as anyone else's (which is "not very" in some cases, to be fair). They don't do this out of altruism, obviously, but they realize sometimes people want good support for particular standards.

Re:Translation:

[Simetrical]

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if IE9 at a bare minimum supports <video> and <audio> It's such a simple thing to hack into the engine that even they should be able to pull it off without any fuss.

From talking with Gecko, WebKit, and Presto developers on the public-html and whatwg mailing lists about video/audio, my impression is that they definitely are not so simple. But Adrian Bateman of Microsoft has clearly stated on public-html that he thinks video and audio are a good idea, so it seems likely they'll go for it at some point (although I wouldn't bet on IE9).

As for codecs, I'd bet they do like Apple and just go with supporting whatever the system video codecs are (Safari uses QuickTime). They already have complete video-playing implementations, like Apple but unlike Mozilla or Opera or Google, so why would they rewrite or fork it for IE? Although, like Apple, they do hold patents on H.264, so maybe they'll also avoid Theora support.

Re:Translation:

[geminidomino]

It's not microsoft-bashing. They can "support" all the standards they want (which is evidently not many), but when they are trying to get a seat on the specification committee, so to speak, it's a given they're up to no good.

Re:Translation:

[RockDoctor]

All of the sudden, there would be no need for Autodesk (or their ridiculous dongles and other assorted pap).

If you look from the other end of the telescope, seeing them as revenue-protection devices rather than as any sort of customer assistance device, then Autodesk's "dongles" suddenly look a lot less ridiculous.
(Caveat - I haven't worked with Autodesk for over a decade, and then it was on a pirated (i.e. stolen) copy running on a DOS machine ; but at work we've been using revenue-protection devices for a lot longer than that. But we do go to significant efforts to make the process simple for the client - if they have problems with the installation, we'll happily send a technician to their site, where-ever they are in the world. And yes, we do mean "where-ever in the world". The charges are covered in the lease.)

Re:Translation:

[JackieBrown]

There is 64 bit flash. While it took a while for it to come out, it is still better than anything Microsoft offers of silverlight for Linux.

Also, adobe spent the money on developing it for Linux (since it is closed.) Microsoft does not and always stays pretty far ahead of the Linux one. While they may not be hindering silverlight's development, they are not contributing to it working on my machine.

This makes silverlight not relevant to me.

Re:Translation:

[RobertM1968]

I do hope they don't join just to ruin the standard or offer halfassed support for it.

Why else *would* they join?

I'm all for Microsoft-bashing, but that's over the top. Microsoft realizes that sometimes their interests lie in supporting certain standards. They support lots of standards to the letter.

You havent named any... which ones?

CSS2.1 support in IE8 is as good as any other browser if not better, for instance.

No, it's not. They have made great improvements, that much I will grant them, but they are not compliant. I STILL have to test things in IE8 and find things that do not work. Oddly, 99% of the time, it works in FF, Opera, Chrome and Safari. And I am talking about "standards" based CSS usage taken right from the docs.

Their C and C++ compilers,

Are compliant how? They are tailored to Windows specific things. I prefer GCC and such, where I can write an app for Windows, Linux, OS/2, MacOSX.

Besides, since they (MS's compilers) tend to use non-standard calls for a lot of the code they create, that's bound to their libraries, how important is it that it supports standards as well? How many people hand code all their C/C++ nowadays? That's the only way I could see it being possible to create standards compliant code with their compilers.

SQL database,

Really? Or maybe I missed something in the new release (which I have not tested - so I guess you may have more knowledge in this area than me).

POSIX implementation, and so forth are about as standards-compliant as anyone else's (which is "not very" in some cases, to be fair). They don't do this out of altruism, obviously, but they realize sometimes people want good support for particular standards.

Keep in mind, in the areas that affect users, they are far from compliant in most everything they release, like document formats, the browser (HTML, CSS, Javascript, etc), PNG support, SVG support and so on.

The few areas they have made improvements have been because their battle to make their own implementations the standard is failing (namely browsers) causing them to lose marketshare (well, it's ONE of the reasons anyway).

In other areas, like this one (the article at hand), when they have a competing product they have not yet given up on, I doubt there is any intent to create a standards compliant product - just as in the past. Them adhering to any standards has always (historically) been to try to regain market share when they begin to realize their competing product is losing it due to their non-compliance.

And historically, if they manage to re-gain that marketshare and a sufficient enough lead, they revert to trying to fragment the marketplace by making things incompatible again to lock people into their solutions and their OS.

Re:Translation:

[RobertM1968]

True... except I'd beg to differ on one point. Boycotts against some monopolies (IE) do seem to work. I drive virtually every tech customer we get to Firefox. 90% of them never revert back to IE.

I suspect such efforts from other tech support people (whether the semi-tech helping the family and friends, or the techs in the field) is part of what is driving Firefox's increasing marketshare at IE's expense. It's taking time, but it is working.

Re:Translation:

[True Grit]

True... except I'd beg to differ on one point. Boycotts against some monopolies (IE) do seem to work.

Yes, thats why I said 'almost', but as far as IE goes, I suspect that our ability to break its stranglehold on the net had more to do with MS's own complacency as anything else (allowing IE's technology to stagnate). By the time they belatedly realized IE's monopoly position was in trouble, they had to restart their R&D on IE's technology/codebase, and that took too much time. By the time they caught up with FF, IE's monopoly position in the market was gone.

Of course, people like you and I helped as well. Like you, I steered a lot of my Win-using family to FF as well. :)

I do agree that monopolies are not *impossible* to break, just that they're very hard to break.

Good morning Microsoft!

[McNihil]

Nice of you to finally join the rest of the class, did you drink too much last decade?

What could possibly go wrong?

[erroneus]

Okay, where is the "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" tag? This article screams for it.

Re:What could possibly go wrong?

[jones_supa]

And, of course the classic "itsatrap" (which I already promoted).

Shenanigans

[fuckface]

First sentence of TFA:
As a part of Microsoft's continued commitment to interoperability and standards support...

Uh, when did that happen? I have yet to see M$ ever work toward either of those goals.

Re:Shenanigans

[Daniel_Staal]

Sure they have: They have always strived to make sure everyone is able to use their standards via their products.

Re:Shenanigans

[Anonymous Coward]

They're completely committed to the standards process. Committed to fucking it up the ass, that is.

Re:Shenanigans

[msclrhd]

As a part of Microsoft's continued commitment to /subvert, buyout, blackmail, corrupt, destroy and bend to our will/ interoperability and standards support...

Re:Shenanigans

[Akita24]

Silly /.er, do you really think they're talking about anything outside of their own products and standards?

Re:Shenanigans

[SmitherIsGod]

Sometimes. Remember Play4Sure?

It's not unusual for open office to be better at opening old .doc files than later versions of MS office.

Two Words

[Anonymous Coward]

Embrace and Extend.
 
And in the process totally destroy what was once a thing of beauty.
 
They've done it before, and odds are they'll do it again.

They are already on the working group

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft is already on the working group. Are they saying that after years of dragging their feet and dragging the process out as long as possible, now that the standard is gaining traction, that, well, yes, it's time to come out of the cold? What a bunch of maroons. Based on a lifetime of experience in IT, I don't trust them any farther than I can spit.

66.43% of browsers do not support SVG

[caffeinejolt]

SVG adoption needs Microsoft to gain critical mass. 66.43% SVG figure is based on December StatOwl.com figures.

Resist! its just OOXML all over again

[phonewebcam]

Here we go again: http://noooxml.wikidot.com

"Committee stuffing is a standard practice for Microsoft. Microsoft raped ISO with their office file formats, leaving the organization in limbo. The whole campaign against the format have raised an army of people, which are furious about the dirty tactics used by Microsoft to get the broken standard through ISO. This anger won't go away, and I wish good luck to Microsoft to get it adopted by governments. The reputation of Microsoft went down below zero with this process."

Re:Resist! its just OOXML all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately you are wrong. Most people in government who make decisions about which system to use are probably unaware of the ISO reape. How would they know? They don't read the technical press, if they did they would get bored reading the first paragraph. The Microsoft consultants who advise them would tell them otherwise, take them out for a meal, and laugh off any of the FUD.

Politicians don't read Slashdot.

Re:Resist! its just OOXML all over again

[Ginger Unicorn]

that particular stunt didn't break the entire ISO, just the particular committee involved. The rest of ISO is as it was before MS stuffed that committee with disinterested astroturf puppets that will never show up to vote again.

Re:Resist! its just OOXML all over again

[Simetrical]

Here we go again: http://noooxml.wikidot.com/

"Committee stuffing is a standard practice for Microsoft. Microsoft raped ISO with their office file formats, leaving the organization in limbo. The whole campaign against the format have raised an army of people, which are furious about the dirty tactics used by Microsoft to get the broken standard through ISO. This anger won't go away, and I wish good luck to Microsoft to get it adopted by governments. The reputation of Microsoft went down below zero with this process."

The SVG Working Group is composed of . . . well, it seems to be "query failed" right now. But anyway, each organization gets one vote. It's made up of Microsoft's competitors. Microsoft cannot stuff the committee, it's not possible within W3C procedures, unless they get lots of little organizations to join and pay them to swing the vote. Which they've never done in well over a decade of W3C membership, despite being members of the Working Groups for CSS, Web Fonts, HTML, etc., etc. So no, they're probably joining the committee to influence the standard because they want to implement it and have feedback. Like every other implementer. Even if their motives differ a bit.

Executable code, here we come

[Animats]

You just know that Microsoft will try to stick in some way to embed executable code, so SVG files can invoke "platform specific services".

Besides, without that, it won't be useful for viruses and trojans.

Re:Executable code, here we come

[Hurricane78]

Well, there already is the ability to add scripts (as in every browser, usually JavaScript) to SVG, just like you would with XHTML, since both are XML-based. So MS could simply expose an API to JS. Oh wait, it already does that! (ActiveX, even partially DirectX.)

Re:Executable code, here we come

[adpe]

Thank you. A lot of people know about the "E&E&E" punchline, but very few actually actually understand how it works. I was thinking exactly the same, but you posted it first. Mod parent up. Well, if he wasn't at +5 already.

Re:Executable code, here we come

[Anonymous Coward]

Hate to break it to you - the full SVG spec already supports Javascript for things like animation and such.

All they need to do to discredit SVG files is implement them in their own little special way in IE9 with all sorts of helpful extensions - like the clever ability to write to disk (especially useful for displaying web pages)! Seeking to help develop the SVG standard just makes it easier for people to blame the standard when things go wrong.

Re:Executable code, here we come

[BitZtream]

Its already there, its called foreign objects, and MS had nothing to do with its introduction. Of course depending on your definition you might want to count the fact that it supports scripting and that the scripting interface is extensible allowing for fully standard compliant SVG files using script parsers that don't exist yet.

If you had a clue, you might realize that pretty much every document format in use has a way to do so on every OS.

The need to embed executable code in order to render other objects is something most standards designers actually plan on when developing these standards. Its called forwards compatibility and extensibility.

I'm sorry that you feel in order for documents to be useful they have to be a pain in the ass to view and require you to meet some unknown list of installed dependancies before you view it. I really do hope that at some point you realize that embedding 'platform specific services' and 'executable code' directly in documents is not a MS invention and is done by everyone, including your web browser (with the exception of Lynx perhaps).

It amazes me how ignorant people can be and still get modded insightful. You use applications and document formats that do this all day long, yet you only shout when MS does it.

Seriously, stop being such a douche fanboy and get a clue before you start talking again.

Re:Executable code, here we come

[tuomoks]

But, but, .. without that capability the poor developers don't know what to do? At least that's what I have heard last 20 years - every time (!) when bringing this up with any company they really, really need the capability to execute any (!) code / command coming in - can't be dangerous or any security problem, our provider / manufacturer said so and their salesman is a certified specialist - actually has 3 certificates from company XXXX and another 3 certificates from company YYYY !! Would be hilarious if it wouldn't be so sad - the IT / computer world is turning to commodity without any skills needed any more!

Back to the subject - it would / could be great and benefit everyone IF Microsoft could be trusted but as many have already said - if they don't even hint / promise to support a standard in their own product - how can anyone trust them? Sounds weird - or maybe not.

Silverlight failed...

[SebaSOFT]

And NOW they embrace SVG. It's hilarious......

Its like bein' taken out fo' a beer by ...

[crovira]

"Two Fingerz Ronnie" and he calls you into the back of the place, so he can slip you a shiv between da ribs an' he don' have to walk as far to dispose of da body in the alley 'round back.

I'd trust MS about as much as I'd trust "Two Fingerz."

They like to embrace, extend, fuck you up, go back on standards, steal your technology and leave you bleeding in a back alley. (Remember J-Script? Not JavaScript, J-Script. They couldn't call it JavaScript. But they tried.)

MS has NEVER played straight with ANYBODY.

There's an old saying about Microsoft..

[mewsenews]

Embrace <-- you are here
Extend
Extinguish

Re:There's an old saying about Microsoft..

[xs650]

Like an aids infested prostitute.

it's a trap

[MoFoQ]

it's a trap....didn't Microsoft do the same thing with other working groups (even other working groups of W3C)?
Not including the OpenDocument/XML "issue".

BSD licensed implementation?

[Midnight Thunder]

Until Microsoft commits to supporting SVG in IE it is hard to see Microsoft's supposed support of the standard as anything but disingenuous.

Well we certainly have a right to be cynical, given past events, but odd things happen. For example Sony has started supporting SD!?

One question though, is there any BSD styled SVG implementation that could be grafted onto a browser?

That's nice

[metamatic]

As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.

Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.

[Opinions mine, not IBM's.]

Re:That's nice

[Hurricane78]

Interesting. Without you mentioning it, we wouldn’t even know that you have anything to do with IBM.

Why do people always think others would think that by default they would state anything else than their own opinion? Stating your own opinion is the default. No matter if some asshole might want to pull some shit on you, acting all egocentric, on how this also affects him, because you are in some remote way related.
Protip: He’s the asshole. He’s wrong. You should act insulted that he thinks crap like that. You should define how things are. You should tell someone (e.g. your boss) who pulls this shit on you, that you are disappointed and that he should be ashamed of himself for thinking something like that. Because he has to be ashamed for his behavior.

It’s basic common sense: People state what they themselves think. Is that so hard?

Re:That's nice

[metamatic]

Why do people always think others would think that by default they would state anything else than their own opinion?

Beats me, but IBM has advised me that I should include a brief disclaimer if I write about things which relate to IBM's areas of business, in places where people might think I was repeating IBM policy.

Since I don't try to keep my identity secret on Slashdot, I figure "better safe than sorry".

When writing (for example) about parakeet training, I don't bother with the disclaimer...

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.

Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.

[Opinions mine, not IBM's.]

Assuming that Microsoft would like to help refine the standard because the standard is broken (for their needs), does it really make sense that they need to implement a standard just so they can help redefine the standard and implement that? Keep in mind, from a committee perspective, Microsoft has the potential to offer a lot. Simply having support in Internet Explorer so that it gains widespread support would be a lot.

Not that I believe Microsoft to have good intentions, mind you. But the requirement for them to implement SVG in their browser could result in significant wasted effort on their part (assuming they are in it for the right reasons and want to push SVG themselves). At the same time it provides absolutely no guarantee that they will not push SVG into a worse state once they do implement SVG and become a committee member (assuming they're in it for the wrong reasons).

Re:That's nice

[Angst Badger]

Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.

Pretty much. It'd be like me wanting to get in on the SVG committee, and I have one advantage that Microsoft doesn't: I've actually used SVG. Okay, two advantages: I don't have a vested interest in seeing the standardization process fail miserably.

Re:That's nice

[geminidomino]

Why do people always think others would think that by default they would state anything else than their own opinion? Stating your own opinion is the default.

It's not "people", it's "lawyers."

Re:That's nice

[shutdown -p now]

As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.

There is a difference between "refining" and "extending".

"Refining" is when you say, "oh, you know, I've tried to implement the spec, but paragraph 3 of section 13.4 is contradictory to paragraph 5 of section 7.9, and feature described by section 11.2 is underspecified, because it is not clear how case X should be handled, and nor it is stated that it's implementation-defined" - and then work together with other people working on the standard to ensure that all ambiguities are removed, all underspecified bits are properly specified, etc. That is a perfectly normal activity to engage in for any implementer.

"Extending" is when you say, "What a nice format you have here! But it would be even better if you also add features X, Y and Z to it, and I even have specs for those at hand". That is a different story, but for some reason people keep forgetting that MS works quite successfully and productively in many standard committees, and have done so for years; for example, ISO WG21 (The C++ Standards Committee) - Herb Sutter, an MS representative in the committee, submitted several proposals that made their way into C++0x, and served as a convener and secretary from 1998 to 2008.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

if fully implementing the current SVG standard was a requirement then it would be a pretty damn empty meeting room for the standards commitee.

Re:That's nice

[FreakyGreenLeaky]

I'm afraid he lives in the real world where corporate lawyers lurk. Just as you cannot expect any real privacy on the net, so too can you not expect anything you post to not be used against you.

Re:That's nice

[Simetrical]

As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.

Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.

[Opinions mine, not IBM's.]

IBM happens to employ Sam Ruby, one of the co-chairs of the HTMLWG. Would you say IBM should not be allowed to have its members in the HTMLWG to work on HTML5 until IBM has a working HTML4 implementation? Because, you know, they don't, as far as I've heard.

Re:That's nice

[metamatic]

IBM doesn't have the same history of subverting standards bodies.

Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[caffeinejolt]

Based on this growth trend, I'd say Silverlight has a future still.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[Anonymous Coward]

Silverlight is far more superior to flash from a run time and development perspective, the only its missing is adoption and anti-ms sediment which is really what keeps flash going.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[Clover_Kicker]

Maybe, but that little chart is in Flash.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[pnewhook]

I never did figure out what Silverlight was for. I went to one site that required it (cant even remember what the site was for), tried to install it but it refused to work.

Never found a need for it since.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[Anonymous Coward]

perhaps you are a buffoon?

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[xaxa]

I went to Ryanair.com to look for a flight. The route map uses Silverlight, which was sufficient to make me give up and fly with EasyJet instead. (I don't care if there is a way to get Silverlight to work on Linux, it's not worth the effort.)

I emailed Ryanair (and got an "I'm out of the office for a week" reply, so I know the address I found was genuine) but obviously they haven't changed anything.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[pnewhook]

No. I've just never (except once) come across it. Maybe it is completely unpopular and not used. Maybe the name is non-descriptive. Maybe it's pointless as other plugins do whatever its supposed to do.

Maybe I have better things to do rather than track down the latest crap fad.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they are happier without needy technojerks on their flights.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[Nocuous]

Netflix uses Silverlight to stream on-demand movies and tv. It works quite well for me.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[Shimbo]

Maybe they are happier without needy technojerks on their flights.

Ryanair hate all their customers, it's not discriminatory.

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[pnewhook]

Ok. I do on demand hi-def movies from my cable provider. Also Netflix is not available here in Canada

Re:Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

[True Grit]

Silverlight is the fastest growing plugin...

only because it has the most headroom to grow into, considering that its *still* dead-last behind everyone else.

That later part (still dead-last) is the interesting thing, given that Silverlight's master is also the master of Windows: why hasn't Silverlight jumped to a usage percentage similar to Window's own market share?

Given the Windows monopoly, I'm astonished that Silverlight hasn't even reached 50% penetration yet. Heck, until I saw your link, I thought it *was* more wide-spread.

Wow, MS caves on SVG, and now I discover Silverlight isn't even over 50% of the market after 3 years of being pimped hard by MS. Dunno if I can handle this much good news from a Microsoft-related thread simultaneously, its certainly not what I'm used too...

Batik?

[gbutler69]

Quick, pick yourself up off the floor.

Re:Batik?

[BitZtream]

I use and love Batik, it is used as a core part of our business now.

The problem is, its Java. The only place I can use it is in Java land, yet most of my apps are not Java. That means I generally have to shell out to a java process of some sort, feed it an SVG, and get back a static image that can be used in the calling application.

Works fine for us for the most part, we use it for back end processing of images for a website and then just send the static rendered image down the wire since we can't expect any browser or email client to actually rendered the image correctly. (Firefox and WebKit won't cut it, we aren't generating basic images with just a few primitive shapes with solid fills).

We need a BSD (or LGPL v2 MAYBE) implementation in C that can be used by all langauges.

We need Batik quality SVG renderer written as a C library so it can be shared by everyone. Like I said, I love Batik its simply the best SVG renderer on the planet, but I can't use it where I want to use it.

and HTML5?

[gbjbaanb]

So where does this leave WebGL? Hopefully untarnished and free to become the de-facto web standard for vector graphics... oh, unless MS now decides that SVG support is sufficient and they don't need to support WebGL at all thus starting another "war" of which browser supports what features.

Re:and HTML5?

[Peter Amstutz]

WebGL is a canvas drawing API (basically a binding of OpenGL ES 2 into Javascript) and not a document format (the equivalent document format would be something like X3D). You could probably implement a SVG viewer in Javascript that rendered to the canvas tag, but Internet Explorer doesn't support the HTML5 canvas, either.

Re:The 3 E's

[mr exploiter]

I think it's "Embrace, extend and extinguish"

Wooosh.

Text editor

[AlpineR]

Close. Since SVG is a markup language, I develop mine in a text editor. Or I write Python programs that turn my data into SVG animations automatically.

I have Adobe Illustrator CS3 but there's not much point exporting from it into SVG. I'm better off exporting to PDF for static documents or using Flash for animations since those formats are widely viewable.

Re:The 3 E's

[Slash.Poop]

No, it's enhance. But thanks for asking ;)

itsatrap ...

[Anonymous Coward]

What, no "itsatrap" tag on the story? I'd add it myself, but I have no idea of how tags get added to stories. :-P

WC3?

[ZsoL]

I think that WC3 should be more like W3C, or am I missing something? ;)

Re:WC3?

[Locke2005]

No, it's WC3, or Wankers Creating Crufty Crap. W3C would be the World Wide Web Consortium, an altogether different group.

Re:WC3?

[narcc]

I see the difference in names:

WC3 - Wankers Creating Crufty Crap
W3C - World Wide Web Consortium

However, the two organizations goals seem to parallel one another.

Re:WC3?

[Locke2005]

True, but the Wankers are slightly better organized.

are ms' intentions truly honest?

[tmp31416]

oh, microsoft wants to join in svg development.

right.

just like intel that joined the ieee1394 (firewire) committee... ...just to undermine the standardization process of firewire.

bill's people will use the same shenanigans that intel used (maybe we'll support it, maybe we won't... etc.) in order to get its own technology out and established before svg can get a real foothold in the market, if it ever becomes more than a marginal oddity like ogg.

or they will use the same "embrace, extend & extinguish" tactics they used with java.

how can microsoft be kept in check (on a tight leash?) to ensure they don't corrupt the svg standard?

you can't change *decades* of nasty, predatorial behaviour overnight. i strongly doubt ms' intentions are honest.

tmp31416

p.s.: taco, the new (current) slashot is awful. could there be a way to view it in "usable" mode (i.e., pre-2004 or thereabout) without having to log in?

Could VML have been a contender?

[mrFur]

I couldn't be called a Micro$oft fan, but VML (while as painful as programming a TI-38) was useful in IE only environments (a man has to eat), and Microsoft tried to go down the standards route (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-VML). The fact that VML was never adopted outside of IE, combined with lack of features, effectively killed it. What I did find annoying was the fact that MS locked down the office extensions to VML rather than continuing down a standards path - all those pretty pictures you can generated in power point can't be generated in the browser.

Let me fix that for you Ballmer

[Anonymous Coward]

"Microsoft wants to fuck up the W3C SVG effort."

They will piss in your Wheaties.

[Stumbles]

Get ready for Microsoft to sabotage them much like they did with the XML standards.

Want to help?

[Lord Lode]

MS, if you want to help SVG, how about supporting the current standard of it in your browser? kthx.

Motivation

[DragonWriter]

Silverlight didn't work, and we still want to kill Flash.

That's probably part of it, but I wonder if the fact that Microsoft is trying to play in the tablet space -- where reading ebooks is a key application -- and SVG support is required for conformant .epub readers (with .epub is increasingly dominant for ebooks) might be a factor.

Off-topic: use modifiers

[Antiocheian]

Consider using modifiers to your advantage.

I often find "Offtopic", "Overrated" and "Flamebait" to be more like "I don't like it". "Troll" is often funnier than "Funny". "Redundant" is usually OK but rarely used. So I am using a positive modifier to almost everything (except anonymous postings) and moderation now serves me to mark postings which were compelling enough for someone to moderate them.

Re:Off-topic: use modifiers

[jsebrech]

moderation now serves me to mark postings which were compelling enough for someone to moderate them.

But how does that rhyme with the notion that all things are good in moderation?

Yes, you can in fact groan out loud at that one.

Be vewy, vewy quiet....

[XB-70]

Psssttt!!! Hehwo! I'm MS Fudd and I'm going to catch us a vectoh gwaphics standahd - but you have to be vewy, vewy quiet about what you awer going to do..

We wiwl pwetend to be fwends wif him - then sneak up on the widdow fellah and bwast 'im!!!

Cawfuw - don't let anybody know!!!

Too little, too late

[fretlessjazz]

If Microsoft had any hopes of retaining a shred of relevance in the next generation of browsers, they would be throwing their support behind HTML5 Canvas, not SVG.

You forgot

[Trailer Trash]

to put "help" in double-quotes.

Like when my kids decide to "help" make cookies.

Only, we still end up with something tasty when they help me.

Designers tend to use Illustrator

[Sits]

While I use Inkscape myself the designers I knew used Adobe Illustrator for vector work. And boy was some of their stuff good - what they could with that Bezier spline tool beggared belief. One guy's Illustrator portrait of his girlfriend looked like it was painted...

Re:Designers tend to use Illustrator

[treeves]

Maybe it was. In a way. Imported a bitmap in and traced/vectorized it, then added artistic touches to make it less photographic looking.

Trojan horse

[mollog]

Seems to me that SVG will help deliver the death blow to Microsoft's monopoly on the desktop. Once SVG is implemented, it can be used to provide a 'desktop'. Once a desktop is widely adopted, Microsoft is redundant.

Microsoft's only play is to sabotage the standards.

Call me a conformist...

[mrthoughtful]

Must that I am unfond of Microsoft business tactics, and hegemonising in manners that are contrary to the benefits of the community at large, I am tentatively very happy that Microsoft has joined the SVG WG. On two counts - firstly, that they will add native support for it in their IE product (which, as far as I can see, is inevitable unless they truly are demonic); and secondly that it opens up a hope that they will move onto standards compliance, skip into the 21st century and support XHTML as an XML instance rather than as an HTML extension of an SGML instance. Then at last, I won't have to have a fix for /> , <div />, <script /> problems that arise after normalising XHTML documents.

Re:Call me a conformist...

[jsebrech]

support XHTML as an XML instance rather than as an HTML extension of an SGML instance. Then at last, I won't have to have a fix for <textarea /> , <div />, <script /> problems that arise after normalising XHTML documents.

More likely you'll just end up staring at "xml parsing error, mismatched tag" all day long. Honestly, why people ever started backing a way of working that completely breaks down with even the smallest vagueness in what crosses the wire is beyond me. Good design is liberal in what it accepts and strict in what it puts out. Generating valid XHTML but parsing it as tag soup, that's the right way to go about things.

Re:Call me a conformist...

[mrthoughtful]

Honestly, why people ever started backing a way of working that completely breaks down with even the smallest vagueness in what crosses the wire is beyond me.

You mean like compilers, or assembler, or mathematical expressions? The problem is that as soon as you allow for vagueness, you have ambiguity. Where there is ambiguity, you have ad hoc interpretation. Where there is ad hoc interpretation, there's a hole (the hole exploited by ms in the beginning) that allows proprietary interpretation.

Generating valid XHTML but parsing it as tag soup, that's the right way to go about things.

What I am talking about is much more simple. MSIE doesn't even recognise valid XHTML. I'm not suggesting that they stop 'quirks' - just that they start recognising valid XHTML using the XML document model, rather than the outdated SGML/HTML engine which cannot handle legal XML synonyms. MSIE doesn't even recognise application/xhtml as a valid XHTML mimetype.

Oh, I can see where this is going --

[dwiget001]

--

MSFT: Why, yes, we are here to help!

SVG WG: Uh, O.K., how exactly are you going to do that?

MSFT: Ever heard of a company called "Netscape"? Well, by cutting off their air supply, we made them a household name!

SVG WG: Oh, great....

LMFAO

[Anonymous Coward]

hahahha it's quite funny because M$ sucks fat wang when it comes to standards. It must be because Linux uses svg for tons of icons etc....

I don't get it

[FirstTimeCaller]

This whole SVG versus XAML thing never made sense to me. The two seem incredibly similar.

Consider SVG:

path d="M153 334 C153 334 151 334 151 334 C151 339 153 344 156 344 C164 344 171 339 171 334 C171 322 164 314 156 314 C142 314 131 322 131 334 C131 350 142 364 156 364 C175 364 191 350 191 334 C191 311 175 294 156 294 C131 294 111 311 111 334 C111 361 131 384 156 384 C186 384 211 361 211 334 C211 300 186 274 156 274" style="fill:white;stroke:red;stroke-width:2" /

and the equivalent XAML:

Path Data="M153 334 C153 334 151 334 151 334 C151 339 153 344 156 344 C164 344 171 339 171 334 C171 322 164 314 156 314 C142 314 131 322 131 334 C131 350 142 364 156 364 C175 364 191 350 191 334 C191 311 175 294 156 294 C131 294 111 311 111 334 C111 361 131 384 156 384 C186 384 211 361 211 334 C211 300 186 274 156 274" Fill="White" Stroke="Red" StrokeThickness="2" /

The two are so similar a simple Perl script could easily do the conversion. So why the resistance to support SVG by Microsoft? (Certainly the implementation is trivial given the Silverlight codebase). And why the hating on XAML? It seems obvious that its feature set was heavily influenced by SVG.

Let's merge the two (or not) and move on to more important things.

Don't even have to extend to extinguish

[l0b0]

Another simple tactic for them would be to simply bog down the SVG approval process to the point where the next version will be obsolete by the time it's approved. Queue tons of implementations conforming to a moving target and lots of extra work while the real MS heads get together to churn out another competitor as fast as they can.

Why silverlight is hated

[SmallFurryCreature]

All the browsers except one (go ahead, guess which one) are becoming capable enough to do a lot of animation and tricks that people used to put in flash, themselves.

Flash itself is hated because it ruins the web, it locks up data in an executable that can't be indexed.

And then, MS comes along and rather then improve its browser to support standards, it adds a flash copy. Who needs it? Do we REALLY want to go back to the days of the web bubble where you had a dozen plugins begging to be installed? Bad enough that flash survived, we don't need a new one.

It also ruins the browser experience for those who have trouble with sight. The rest of the web can be spoken or enlarged or contrast changed (not IE) but that doesn't work for plugins.

The only use I seen for silverlight is to embed video. Why introduce yet another closed source player when it would have been trivial for MS to just support the video tag.

Make no mistake, silverlight is nothing more then activex 2.0. Yet another attempt by MS to turn the browser into a windows only experience.

Re:Why silverlight is hated

[ClubStew]

Silverlight supports Accessibility APIs natively. It also works on Mac and Linux (through Moonlight). It can also be easily scaled if, for example, hosted in a DIV with relative size (and, optionally, positioning).

Re:Why silverlight is hated

[Anonymous Coward]

wierd, cause...silverlight runs on mac, windows (also on firefox), and linux (via moonlight). Photosynth and other deepzoom implementations each required thier own implementations of browser plugins (which had to be created for each browser) before they were ported to silverlight. And Silverlight has the capability to be indexed, thereby addressing some of the same problems that flash causes.

Another point you mention is the requirement to install a bunch of plugins..and not wanting to go back to those days. However a platform like Flash or Silverlight directly addresses that aspect..when they become umbiquitous they allow for developers to have a platform upon which to build several different applications without having to cause users to reinstall over and over again.

ActiveX was an elevation model..if you allowed an activex app to run, you had to give it full trust. Flash and silverlight both run in sandboxes with varying levels of security applied to them. If there is a security exploit, it can be fixed in one place vs. several.

I think that you haven't really tried to undertsand the technology, and I think it's ironic that you bash aspects of flash which silverlight specifically addresses. Both Adobe and Microsoft have made great leaps in the recent years to make these extension models (which is really what they are) of the browsers more powerful. By end of year both will have full acceleration for video cards, and give web designers yet more powerful tools to create web applications.

Re: Enlarging...Silverlight and flash are both scalar based and support zooming..it's on the app developers to support accessability. Ignorant design that doesnt take into account fundamentals is crappy design, doesnt matter if the host (browser, OS, etc.) supports it or not.

Re:Why silverlight is hated

[Serious Callers Only]

Silverlight supports Accessibility APIs natively. It also works on Mac and Linux (through Moonlight). It can also be easily scaled if, for example, hosted in a DIV with relative size (and, optionally, positioning).

Silverlight is technically very good. That is not the reason people oppose it. They oppose it because Microsoft has typically used control over technology to kill competitors (Java, HTML, CSS, SVG, etc), and Silverlight is an obvious play to extend control to any internet media by replacing Flash. They will make it just good enough to get market share then use it as a club to bludgeon partners and users with, and if you get in their way, they'll 'fucking kill you'. They've done it before after all, and they'll do it again.

As such it doesn't interest me - I'd prefer a more open solution that doesn't give Microsoft control.

Re:Why silverlight is hated

[CAIMLAS]

My wife takes courses online at PSU. She had to use a Windows computer with 1024x768 or greater resolution to access online -presentations- . This was a problem even at that resolution due to how Silverlight handled the text within the presentations: it would run 'underneath' on the bottom of the presentation/slideshow. It was not scalable at all.

That's not such a problem so much specifically, but it cuts out any netbooks from being used (x600 resolution or so), and almost made x768 difficult. I challenge you to find a laptop out there right now which isn't using an x786 LCD panel that doesn't cost $600+.

Yes, that's right: Silverlight pretty much makes a $500 computer unusable for the display of textual information. Not in all cases, but many. Even flash doesn't do that.

Re:Why silverlight is hated

[True Grit]

It also works on Mac and Linux (through Moonlight).

Moonlight doesn't, probably can't, so likely never will, support the Silverlight DRM codecs (that DRM is required by Netflix, and practically every other Silverlight website), thus, for this topic at least, Moonlight != Silverlight.

Re:Why silverlight is hated

[True Grit]

silverlight runs on mac, windows (also on firefox), and linux (via moonlight).

[cut-n-paste of a response I made above here]

Moonlight doesn't, probably can't, so likely never will, support the Silverlight DRM codecs (that DRM is required by Netflix, and practically every other Silverlight website), thus, for this topic at least, Moonlight != Silverlight.

Both Adobe and Microsoft have made great leaps in the recent years to make these extension models (which is really what they are) of the browsers more powerful.

There is one crucial difference though: DRMed Flash works on my OS, Silverlight does not. All other technical details are irrelevant.

Re:Why silverlight is hated

[JackieBrown]

Really - show me a site that supports moonlight's dated version of silverlight.

Show me what microsoft has done to help the linux folks out on pushing mono to 3.5 (or 3.0) so that we can get that support.

I can watch hulu and youtube with no problems on my 64 bit machine. I cannot watch netflix.

Re:Why silverlight is hated

[JackieBrown]

Just to add, I really wouldn't expect Microsoft to do anything to make silverlight playable in Linux. They never did with their other products so there is no reason to be expecting it now.

What I take with issue with is the talk about have silverlight has the save portibilty for OSs as flash.

Correction: Between 50.3% and 66.43% of browsers

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha, you sound like that figure is fixed and not going down. How about this one: 55.66% or this one: 50.3%
There, and I didn't even have to go to the w3schools site like so many people mistakenly do.

Microsoft's first submission to the new SVG std..

[theendlessnow]

Section 1.2.5.3.2.8.200.1

    Entity SILVERLIGHT_30034509, type STREAM

    Contains an open, standard set of Silverlight objects for interpretation.

    Entity SILVERLIGHT_FIXERUPPER, type BOOLEAN

    To work around bugs in Silverlight.

SVG?

[trumpetboy8282]

I just find it amusing that the image shown in TFA as "SVG" is actually a PNG...

mmmhmm

[pak9rabid]

We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform.

Translation: Since the overwhelming majority of vendors is on board with it, we don't want to be left out in the cold

SVG in IE

[Anonymous Coward]

There are already "elegant" solutions that can achieve svg rendering in IE, even 5.5 ... http://www.amplesdk.com/

Run for your life!

[Anonymous Coward]

Stacking independent technology boards, rewarding obedient vendors, stacking standards groups, patenting choke-points while participating in the development of same, oh my... This is akin to having a golfer participate in the development of a Victoria Secrets Calendar. There is going to be a lot of participating and a lot of disappointed parties.

We need to smile...

[Anonymous Coward]

What once was:

We need to smile at Novell we kill them.

Has become:

We need to smile at (Open Source/ Open Standards) as we kill them.

We're Microsoft...

[pydev]

and we're here to help you.

Because JavaScript and ActionScript SUCK!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do people use jQuery? To hide all the browser dependent JavaScript issues.
Why do people use GWT? Because they don't want to see JavaScript.

I'd take Silverlight any day over JavaScript. It delivers the true power on the client side. JUST OPEN SOURCE IT!

Re:Because JavaScript and ActionScript SUCK!

[weston]

Why do people use jQuery? To hide all the browser dependent JavaScript issues.

DOM issues / feature APIs, you mean.

Not the same thing by a long shot.

Overcomplicated

[Stiletto]

I was playing around with the idea of using SVG as a graphics file format for a recent project, but after having a look at the specifications, even SVG "Tiny" is way, way, way overcomplicated. With raster graphics formats out there that can be read and parsed with a couple lines of C code, there is definitely room for a truly SIMPLE vector graphics format.

I'd love to see a "SVG Tiny Tiny Tiny" for those of us that just want a few scalable icons and don't want to build a freaking XML parser into their project.

Alternatively, if anyone can recommend a good C or C++ based support library that takes the pain and suffering out of parsing SVG, I'm interested!

Here's Why

[weston]

Do you hate Silverlight because it's Microsoft

It's reason enough.

After observing a few decades anticompetitive behavior, punctuated with six years during which they utterly and completely neglected Internet Explorer -- the world's primary window to the web -- two things seem pretty apparent to me:

1) Despite all their talk about developers, developers, developers, when they can get away with it, they care about developers not one bit. If they did, some minimal effort towards fixing some of the more egregious problems with IE might have been made, instead of pushing the problems out onto the backs of hundreds of thousands of web authors who had to figure out how to circumvent bugs and irregularities.

2) It's quite likely they'd like pull an embrace-extend-extinguish with the web as whole if they can pull it off. And if they get critical mass for RIAs with Silverlight, they might even be able to pull it off. I don't care how good Silverlight is -- and I've been impressed with some things -- I'm not at all interested in that future.

Re:Here's Why

[Quantumstate]

Microsoft do care about developers. They would love to have more windows developers. They have put a lot of resources into .net and Visual Studio and they are pretty good. What they have problems with is the web where a developer makes a program and it works on Windows, OS X, Linux and a few other OS's. This is bad because it means that nobody needs Windows any more. A major problem Linux has is that a lot of software that people use does not work because it is Windows only and similarly with OS X.

Re:Here's Why

[Just Some Guy]

Despite all their talk about developers, developers, developers, when they can get away with it, they care about developers not one bit.

Microsoft loves developers - Windows developers. They hate dirty hippie possibly-Mac-using cross-platform developers, especially when they're working on inherently open stuff like the web.

Making something that'll run on Windows and only Windows? Ballmer will personally build a shrine to you. Writing a web app that works on stuff other than IE? Partly cloudy and a chance of raining chairs.

Re:Here's Why

[CAIMLAS]

1) It's not "developers" it's their developers they care about. Specifically, whichever development platform Microsoft is pushing at the moment. .NET and ASP were big at the time (and still are, I suppose) so if you want to do anything and have it work halfway or better, that's your ticket on an all-MS platform.
2) Yup. "I embrace, extend, and extinguish" is the only IEEE Microsoft understands.

Development? What is left to develop?

[Anonymous Coward]

SVG and surrounding technologies (EcmaScript, DOM et.c.) is as near perfect as an XML(*) based solution could be. It is based on the good graphics model in PostScript (but has different and far worse font model, propably because it wasn't possible to mimic PS-fonts in something that isn't a real programming language), with a few enhancement and better support for Unicode (especially UTF-8).

What is missing is good browsers and viewers that has full support for SVG.

What MS propably want to do is dumb it down, so that they can manage to create "fully standard complient" viewers. It allready exists a lot of dumbed down versions of the standard and they all have very limited areas of use.

(*) Personally, I would prefer a modernised PostScript. "Just" add easier Unicode support, better support for animation, videos and larger numeric types. Something better than Document Structuring Comments would also be nice. PS is one of my favorite languages, and not just for graphics. It is really good for number crunching (IF the precision is good enough) and text processing, and it is present (GhostScript) on every system that uses CUPS (OS X and most other UNIX(-like) systems/distributions). I like the PS syntax (or lack thereof) and most things are much easier to do with a high level language compared to low(er ;) level languages like Python, Java or Ruby. PS is also really easy to learn compared to Common Lisp and other hll:s, in fact it is easier to learn than most other computer languages, at least if you don't have been made stupid by exposure to some made-for-stupid-people-by-people-who-think-they-are-smarter languages (like Java and C++). It is also better to think-in-PS than to think-in-java/c++ when you deal with JavaScript (but of course it is best if you think-in-JS, when you program JS).

Reminds me of...

[Yvanhoe]

ISO OOXML debacle. Same scenario. Expect the bad guys to win.