Awesome. The dawning of a new era.
Now Desktop Linux has to improve further (I'd say it's around 30% to 60% of the way to be usable as general purpose consumer OS; installation is just a minor aspect), more software makers should offer Linux versions, and more computer retailers should join, with choices of better distros.
And distro makers should not sell the illusion of selling Windows clones; it's far more frustrating for the user to use Linux as Windows, than to use it as Unix, thus learning and adapting to the new concepts. I think Desktop Linux should try to be itself, not disguise itself as cheap Windows or Mac OS X clone. In fact, this strategy, which is intensifying these months, could kill Desktop Linux. If people want Windows, they can use it, if they want Mac OS X, they can use that; why use Linux then?
Linux should advertise it's unique strengths, and concentrate on fixing it's unique weaknesses as a young desktop OS.
I know. But
The "product guide" states:
"The standards Mozilla 1.0 supports include:
SVG"
, which is not true. None of the currently available 1.0 builds have SVG.
And the SVG enabled builds are at a very early and experimental stage; the level of completeness is around 10 to 30 percent of SVG1.0, the builds don't work with the correct MIME Type (141252), have color problems (111152), crash with foreignObject (147920), crash with very large shapes (101300), have no SVG animation, no SVG Font, no text support, no clipping, no filters, and much more.
And SVG 2.0 is coming.
The statement "Mozilla 1.0 supports SVG" is very misleading and incorrect (1.0 doesn't), and can not replace working on the implementation.
I know. As I wrote: there is no SVG support in Mozilla 1.0, which is contradicting the claims made on mozilla.org.
And those SVG builds (which are not "Mozilla 1.0", and are not available form the 1.0 download page) have many problems, and implement only a small subset of SVG; no reason to tout "SVG support" for *Mozilla 1.0*. Check the linked post for more info.
Mozilla 1.0 is out, and the release notes say:
"Supported XML W3C Recommendations
SVG"
"The standards Mozilla 1.0 supports include:
SVG"
but there is no SVG support in 1.0. Ze-ro.
Check
this post for some more info.
Linux Standard Base "Standardizing The Penguin"
on
United Linux is Here
·
· Score: 1
The Linux Standard Base might have been something they should have agreed on. Or perhaps they will anyways. Anyone knows more?
SVG can do everything SWF can and more.
The animation XML grammar you dream of exists: SMIL in SVG. SVG does animation without ECMA script (standardized J-/Java script). You read should check out SVG; it's what you're looking for. (and yes, that includes RTFM).
"SVG was meant for Vector-Graphics, nothing else";
not true. It features typo, ani, pics, real filters, and can be combined with XForms, SMIL, XHTML, etc. You have CSS, XML, SMIL; all the good stuff.
Plus you can script it via ECMA script.
In some cases, both technologies are a fit; but in many fields, SVG offers tremendous advantages, for example: data driven graphics, process monitoring, data visualization, representation of XML data, personalization, internationalization, mapping, and many more. Basically, it's fun. SVG home,
SVG spec.
This
is a book project:
"Unrealistic schedules, unstable releases, continual overtime, and skyrocketing stress levels are legendary in the software development industry."
Here,
you can submit your own experiences in the software development world.
I don't know the book, but it might be interesting.
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/7378/fi scher.htm
says Robert James Fischer
denied the holocaust of the Nazis in an interview to Baguio Radio in the Philippines on On January 14, 1999.
If he did that, it's higly wrong, disgusting, and evil. I'm sad such a person is considered worthwile discussing as a "chess legend"; his denying the holocaust clearly makes it impossible to just talk admiringly about his chess skills.
Would any of you use Dreamweaver without being able to view and edit the source?
So why would anyone create vector animations in Flash without being able to view
and edit the source?
SVG code is a little verbose, but very human readable.
Check out a preview version of WebDraw:
http://www.jasc.com/webdraw.asp
One can also view source of online SVGs; fun.
It's XML, so parse/manipulate/generate it with any of your favourite XML
tools in any of your favourite programming languages.
XML content can be transformed to visual versions for different environments.
(how fast can you say "QuickJugglingMarkupLanguageViaXSLTtoSVGAnimation"
or "myOwnSlideshowMarkupLanguageViaRubyOrPythonToVect orAnimations"
in the Flash/SWF world?)
Since dynamic generation is so convenient, and SVG is a truly high quality
format, you can internationalize and personalize content without too much fuss,
using all the open source technologies that don't even have to know about SVG.
It has Unicode, it's own font format, is searchable and indexable, and works well
with CSS, XSLT, RDF, later SMIL and XForms.
I'm trying to avoid the word "professional", but don't succeed.
Give it a try, check the spec (not to say RT*M)), and basically have great fun.
Would any of you use Dreamweaver without being able to view and edit the source?
So why would anyone create vector animations in Flash without being able to view
and edit the source?
SVG code is a little verbose, but very human readable.
Check out a preview version of WebDraw:
http://www.jasc.com/webdraw.asp
One can also view source of online SVGs; fun.
It's XML, so parse/manipulate/generate it with any of your favourite XML
tools in any of your favourite programming languages.
XML content can be transformed to visual versions for different environments.
(how fast can you say "QuickJugglingMarkupLanguageViaXSLTtoSVGAnimation"
or "myOwnSlideshowMarkupLanguageViaRubyOrPythonToVect orAnimations"
in the Flassh/SWF world?)
Since dynamic generation is so convenient, and SVG is a truly high quality
format, you can internationalize and personalize content without too much fuss,
using all the open source technologies that don't even have to know about SVG.
It has Unicode, it's own font format, is searchable and indexable, and works well
with CSS, XSLT, RDF, later SMIL and XForms.
I'm trying to avoid the word "professional", but don't succeed.
Give it a try, check the spec (not to say RT*M)), and basically have great fun.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.google.de/search?q=definately
/. editors should check articles for typos.
Awesome. The dawning of a new era.
Now Desktop Linux has to improve further (I'd say it's around 30% to 60% of the way to be usable as general purpose consumer OS; installation is just a minor aspect), more software makers should offer Linux versions, and more computer retailers should join, with choices of better distros.
And distro makers should not sell the illusion of selling Windows clones; it's far more frustrating for the user to use Linux as Windows, than to use it as Unix, thus learning and adapting to the new concepts. I think Desktop Linux should try to be itself, not disguise itself as cheap Windows or Mac OS X clone. In fact, this strategy, which is intensifying these months, could kill Desktop Linux. If people want Windows, they can use it, if they want Mac OS X, they can use that; why use Linux then?
Linux should advertise it's unique strengths, and concentrate on fixing it's unique weaknesses as a young desktop OS.
I know. But The "product guide" states:
"The standards Mozilla 1.0 supports include:
SVG"
, which is not true. None of the currently available 1.0 builds have SVG.
And the SVG enabled builds are at a very early and experimental stage; the level of completeness is around 10 to 30 percent of SVG1.0, the builds don't work with the correct MIME Type (141252), have color problems (111152), crash with foreignObject (147920), crash with very large shapes (101300), have no SVG animation, no SVG Font, no text support, no clipping, no filters, and much more. And SVG 2.0 is coming.
The statement "Mozilla 1.0 supports SVG" is very misleading and incorrect (1.0 doesn't), and can not replace working on the implementation.
I know. As I wrote: there is no SVG support in Mozilla 1.0, which is contradicting the claims made on mozilla.org. And those SVG builds (which are not "Mozilla 1.0", and are not available form the 1.0 download page) have many problems, and implement only a small subset of SVG; no reason to tout "SVG support" for *Mozilla 1.0*. Check the linked post for more info.
Mozilla 1.0 is out, and the release notes say:
"Supported XML W3C Recommendations
SVG"
"The standards Mozilla 1.0 supports include:
SVG"
but there is no SVG support in 1.0. Ze-ro.
Check this post for some more info.
The Linux Standard Base might have been something they should have agreed on. Or perhaps they will anyways. Anyone knows more?
whew! what does Christianity have to do with christal Meth; they both start with "Christ" or what?
I don't know if that's true.
I think it's irrelevant, because one fact is clear:
A lot of horrific stuff wouldn't have happened without drugs, that's very sure.
- One guy I knew killed his friend on christal meth.
- Several guys I knew went to the psychiatric hospital because of prescription drugs, and also because of hashish/marijuana.
Make your own decisions, but see reality.Adobe SVG Viewer (Linux version) and check the W3C's list
SVG can do everything SWF can and more.
The animation XML grammar you dream of exists: SMIL in SVG. SVG does animation without ECMA script (standardized J-/Java script). You read should check out SVG; it's what you're looking for. (and yes, that includes RTFM).
"SVG was meant for Vector-Graphics, nothing else"; not true. It features typo, ani, pics, real filters, and can be combined with XForms, SMIL, XHTML, etc. You have CSS, XML, SMIL; all the good stuff. Plus you can script it via ECMA script.
In some cases, both technologies are a fit; but in many fields, SVG offers tremendous advantages, for example: data driven graphics, process monitoring, data visualization, representation of XML data, personalization, internationalization, mapping, and many more. Basically, it's fun.
SVG home, SVG spec.
check native SVG editor WebDraw , tell them what you need in their newsgroup, ask browser makers to support SVG
This is a book project: "Unrealistic schedules, unstable releases, continual overtime, and skyrocketing stress levels are legendary in the software development industry." Here, you can submit your own experiences in the software development world. I don't know the book, but it might be interesting.
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/7378/fi scher.htm
says Robert James Fischer denied the holocaust of the Nazis in an interview to Baguio Radio in the Philippines on On January 14, 1999. If he did that, it's higly wrong, disgusting, and evil. I'm sad such a person is considered worthwile discussing as a "chess legend"; his denying the holocaust clearly makes it impossible to just talk admiringly about his chess skills.
"Either that or you could handcode all your SVG graphics files I guess but that would be ridiculous to even consider doing"
well, until the tools are there...
mostly handcoded (600 loc):
http://www.pinkjuice.com/SVG/svgz/layout02.svgz
Would any of you use Dreamweaver without being able to view and edit the source? So why would anyone create vector animations in Flash without being able to view and edit the source?
SVG code is a little verbose, but very human readable. Check out a preview version of WebDraw: http://www.jasc.com/webdraw.asp One can also view source of online SVGs; fun.
It's XML, so parse/manipulate/generate it with any of your favourite XML tools in any of your favourite programming languages. XML content can be transformed to visual versions for different environments."
ort orAnimations"
in the Flash/SWF world?)
(how fast can you say "QuickJugglingMarkupLanguageViaXSLTtoSVGAnimation
"myOwnSlideshowMarkupLanguageViaRubyOrPythonToVec
Since dynamic generation is so convenient, and SVG is a truly high quality format, you can internationalize and personalize content without too much fuss, using all the open source technologies that don't even have to know about SVG. It has Unicode, it's own font format, is searchable and indexable, and works well with CSS, XSLT, RDF, later SMIL and XForms. I'm trying to avoid the word "professional", but don't succeed.
Give it a try, check the spec (not to say RT*M)), and basically have great fun.
The spec: (pretty readable)
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/
W3's SVG page:
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/
More links: (mine)
http://www.pinkjuice.com/SVG/SVGlinks.htm
"SVG is not well suited for complex web based applications."
it friggin is!
(Flash/SWF's XML support (definitely was and probably still) is a joke)
Would any of you use Dreamweaver without being able to view and edit the source? So why would anyone create vector animations in Flash without being able to view and edit the source?
SVG code is a little verbose, but very human readable. Check out a preview version of WebDraw: http://www.jasc.com/webdraw.asp One can also view source of online SVGs; fun.
It's XML, so parse/manipulate/generate it with any of your favourite XML tools in any of your favourite programming languages. XML content can be transformed to visual versions for different environments."
ort orAnimations"
in the Flassh/SWF world?)
(how fast can you say "QuickJugglingMarkupLanguageViaXSLTtoSVGAnimation
"myOwnSlideshowMarkupLanguageViaRubyOrPythonToVec
Since dynamic generation is so convenient, and SVG is a truly high quality format, you can internationalize and personalize content without too much fuss, using all the open source technologies that don't even have to know about SVG. It has Unicode, it's own font format, is searchable and indexable, and works well with CSS, XSLT, RDF, later SMIL and XForms. I'm trying to avoid the word "professional", but don't succeed.
Give it a try, check the spec (not to say RT*M)), and basically have great fun.
The spec: (pretty readable)
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/
W3's SVG page:
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/
More links: (mine)
http://www.pinkjuice.com/SVG/SVGlinks.htm