Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Graphics Microsoft The Internet

Microsoft Wants To Participate In SVG Development 292

Posted by timothy
from the speak-friend-and-enter dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Wants To Participate In SVG Development

Comments Filter:
  • LOL. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:39PM (#30673708)

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Funny, funny.

    • Translation: (Score:5, Insightful)

      by FooAtWFU (699187) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:49PM (#30673838) Homepage
      Silverlight didn't work, and we still want to kill Flash.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by pete-classic (75983)

        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: (Score:4, Insightful)

          by RobertM1968 (951074) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:13PM (#30674216) Homepage Journal

          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: (Score:4, Insightful)

            by pete-classic (75983) <hutnick@gmail.com> on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:20PM (#30674312) Homepage Journal

            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: (Score:4, Interesting)

            by SenFo (761716) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @05:04PM (#30674824) Homepage

            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 [bing.com] 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 [microsoft.com], so I can't comment on their vantage point. I welcome their comments, however.

            • Re:Translation: (Score:5, Insightful)

              by icebraining (1313345) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @05:47PM (#30675392) Homepage

              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: (Score:4, Insightful)

              by neokushan (932374) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @05:58PM (#30675576)

              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: (Score:4, Interesting)

                by arendjr (673589) on Thursday January 07, 2010 @06:06AM (#30680464) Homepage

                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: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by geminidomino (614729) *

              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.

            • by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @06:35PM (#30676060) Journal

              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: (Score:3, Interesting)

                by ClubStew (113954)
                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).
            • Here's Why (Score:4, Insightful)

              by weston (16146) <westonsd@@@canncentral...org> on Thursday January 07, 2010 @03:11AM (#30679792) Homepage

              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.

      • Based on this growth trend [statowl.com], I'd say Silverlight has a future still.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by anastasd (849943) *
        Yep, Flash is a crime against humanity. :)
      • Motivation (Score:3, Interesting)

        by DragonWriter (970822)

        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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mwvdlee (775178)

      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.

  • by sconeu (64226) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:39PM (#30673726) Homepage Journal

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

  • Torpedo? (Score:5, Funny)

    by pete-classic (75983) <hutnick@gmail.com> on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:40PM (#30673730) Homepage Journal

    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: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jsebrech (525647)

      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 p

  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn.gmail@com> on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:40PM (#30673734) Journal
    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: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Meshach (578918)
      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.

    • by Jason Earl (1894) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:48PM (#30673830) Homepage Journal

      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.

      • by Midnight Thunder (17205) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:08PM (#30674126) Homepage Journal

        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?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by DrXym (126579)
        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?
      • by BitZtream (692029) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @05:50PM (#30675428)

        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).

    • by jpmorgan (517966)

      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: (Score:3, Informative)

        by msclrhd (1211086)

        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 lik

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by msclrhd (1211086)

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

        • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @06:37PM (#30676096) Journal

          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: (Score:2, Funny)

      "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.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:59PM (#30673984)

      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

    • by BitZtream (692029) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @05:44PM (#30675362)

      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).

  • SVG development? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bananatree3 (872975) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:41PM (#30673742)
    What do you developers prefer as a development environment? I personally use Inkscape [inkscape.org], an open source Vector graphics editor. What does Slashdot like to use?
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by SnarfQuest (469614)

      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?

      • Who needs this fancy-smancy graphical interface crap anyway?

        How do you see the rocks?

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by MiniMike (234881)

        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.

      • 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:SVG development? (Score:4, Informative)

      by BitZtream (692029) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @08:59PM (#30677514)

      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

  • Fixed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hduff (570443) <hoytduff.gmail@com> on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:42PM (#30673754) Homepage Journal

    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.

  • 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.
  • by bcmm (768152) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @03:47PM (#30673822)
    Title says it all. We've seen this before, folks.
    • by Verdatum (1257828) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:03PM (#30674034)
      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.
      • by ignavus (213578) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @08:28PM (#30677226)

        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."

    • by crovira (10242) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:06PM (#30674084) Homepage

      "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.

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

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

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

    • by msclrhd (1211086)

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

  • SVG adoption needs Microsoft to gain critical mass. 66.43% SVG figure is based on December StatOwl.com figures [statowl.com].
  • by phonewebcam (446772) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:04PM (#30674046) Homepage

    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."

  • by Animats (122034) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:04PM (#30674050) Homepage

    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.

    • by Hurricane78 (562437) <deleted@slashBLUEdot.org minus berry> on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:32PM (#30674488)

      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: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by BitZtream (692029)

      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 object

  • by mewsenews (251487) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:07PM (#30674102) Homepage

    Embrace <-- you are here
    Extend
    Extinguish

  • 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".

  • That's nice (Score:5, Insightful)

    by metamatic (202216) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @04:10PM (#30674148) Homepage Journal

    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.]

    • 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

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by metamatic (202216)

        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: (Score:3, Informative)

      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 bi

  • 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.

  • by XB-70 (812342) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @05:30PM (#30675186)
    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!!!

  • by theendlessnow (516149) * on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @06:53PM (#30676282)

    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.

  • mmmhmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by pak9rabid (1011935) on Wednesday January 06, 2010 @07:02PM (#30676370)

    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

The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.

Working...